ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS the 4th Regional Stakeholder Forum on the Mekong Basin Development Strategy

Transcription

1

2

3 The Mekong River Commission (MRC) is an inter-governmental river basin organisation built on a foundation of more than 50 years of experience in the region. The organisation has its roots in the United Nations-founded Mekong Committee, which began life in On 5 April 1995, the governments of Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Viet Nam signed The Agreement on Cooperation for the Sustainable Development of the Mekong River Basin, to form the MRC in its current form, with the aim of cooperating in the management of Mekong water resources for their mutual benefit, and to harness the economic potential of the Basin s water resources in a sustainable manner. Basic to this aim is a strong river basin planning process with a comprehensive input and participation of the basin countries and communities. The MRC is partnered with a broad coalition of interests, including the national agencies of the four Member Countries, Dialogue Partners, Development Partners, the United Nations, the private sector and broader civil society.

4

5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Mekong River Commission (MRC) and the Basin Development Plan (BDP) Programme would like to thank the Government of Cambodia for co-hosting the 4 th Regional Stakeholder Forum on the Mekong Basin Development Strategy Moving towards optimal development of the Mekong River Basin. The MRC highly appreciates the involvement of numerous stakeholders, who actively engaged in the Forum, including government representatives, National Mekong Committees and their relevant Line Agencies, research institutes, community representatives, civil society organisations, private sector officials from Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Viet Nam, as well as Dialogue Partners (China and Myanmar) and Development Partners. The MRC would also like to thank all participants, who contributed inputs to the 4 th Regional Stakeholder Forum in the form of papers and presentations as well as those who kindly offered their support in chairing and facilitating the various sessions. Special thanks go to the BDP Regional and National Teams for the organisation and facilitation of the Forum and preparation of these proceedings. Finally, the MRC expresses its deep appreciation for the generous support from our Development Partners including the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), Danish International Development Agency (Danida), Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida). i

6

7 FOREWORD It is with great honour and appreciation that we have the opportunity to present reports, discussions and important outcomes from our peak level stakeholder engagement processes within the present phase of the Basin Development Plan Programme. From November 2014, the MRC and partners organised the 4 th Regional Stakeholder Forum in Siem Reap, Cambodia, with the theme Moving towards Optimal Development of the Mekong River Basin. This is a most important stage in the progressive development of Mekong Basin planning and of the key strategy that underpins it the Basin Development Strategy. The previous Stakeholder Forum held in mid 2010 provided a wide but important range of opinions on how various development scenarios should be formulated, how they should be assessed, how proper consideration should be given to the environmental and social impacts, and where we needed to concentrate actions and studies to close some of the critical knowledge gaps within our understanding of the natural resource and human resource behaviour of the basin. The BDP Team within the MRCS and the four countries worked hard after the 3 rd Forum to take account of the key messages and make adjustments to the planning processes, and particularly, to the draft of the Basin Development Strategy, where it was feasible and sensible to do so. This all led to a milestone achievement in the history of Mekong cooperation, when the Governments of Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Viet Nam in January 2011 adopted their first ever Basin Development Strategy (BDS). The Strategy defined the shared understanding of the development opportunities and associated risks, taking into account developments in the upstream countries of China and Myanmar. It also established strategic priorities to capture these development opportunities and minimize risks, and set out priorities for basin management that sought to make more effective the underpinning processes that support sustainable river basin and water resources management. The Strategy has been implemented over the last 4 years through a Basin Action Plan composing of Regional Action Plan driven by the MRC through its Strategic Plan , and four complementary National Indicative Plans (NIPs), one per country. There has been good progress over much of this agenda during this period but as with all forward-looking plans, some activities have stalled, some data improvement studies have slowed. Notwithstanding, about 80% of activities in the regional plan have been worked on, and 70% of all activities in the national plans have progressed. It is now 4 years since the first BDS was completed and 2015 was always scheduled as the time to look at what we have achieved, what should be changed, what retained and what new additions should occur with an updated edition of the Basin Development Strategy. Central to such a review are the opinions and views of the basin s stakeholders Government Agencies, academic institutions, NGO s, Development Partners and so on. iii

8 This 4 th Forum has focused discussions around three interactive sessions implementation of the Basin Development Strategy, assessment of benefit sharing options, and updating of the Basin Development Strategy. The outputs from these discussions and debates will be invaluable as the updated strategy seeks to capture new data and information and to broaden scenario assessments. Once again, it has been very encouraging to have with us at this Forum, a strong delegation from China. We have already achieved strong cooperation with our Chinese colleagues and our discussions during the forum have identified ways that we can further strengthen the open and frank dialogue and sharing of information that we now have. Finally, and most importantly, we recognise that basin wide planning in the Lower Mekong Basin context is all about the four MRC Member Countries cooperating on transboundary issues and development options that may initially be outside the normal scope of national water related development plans. To move more towards joint projects and to collaborate on assessing transboundary impacts requires much open sharing of information and a willingness to move to a high level of cooperation and collaboration. The next edition of the Basin Development Strategy will move this trust and cooperation to another level as these joint issues and activities start to create and maximise mutual and national benefits and at the same time, reduce transboundary costs and impacts. This is all about a strong commitment to cooperation, and ultimately about integration of the projects supporting basin-wide sustainability into national planning and decision-making all working together to find innovative and mutual benefit sharing and cost reduction solutions. The Forum participants contributed greatly to these discussions and the willingness of all who participated is greatly appreciated. iv

9 v

10 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS FOREWORD EXECUTIVE SUMMARY KEY MESSAGES AT A GLANCE LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS i iii ix xiii xv 1 INTRODUCTION The Basin Development Plan Programme The Basin Development Strategy (BDS) 2 2 THE 4 th REGIONAL STAKEHOLDERS FORUM Objectives and anticipated outcomes Hosts, facilitators, speakers and participants Photo exhibition Field trips The forum webpage 21 3 REVIEW OF THE FORUM PRESENTATIONS Session 1: Opening Remarks Session 2: Getting engaged Session 3a: Results from implementation of the Basin Development Strategy Session 3b: Assessment of scenarios and benefit sharing options Session 3c: Updating of the Basin Development Strategy for Closing Session 62 4 SYNTHESIS OF DIALOGUES FOCUSING THE DISCUSSIONS The MRC Cooperation Role Effective or Not? Optimal Development What Does It Mean? Supporting Analytical Tools Are They Adequate? Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) Still a Mystery? The First Basin Development Strategy Good Progress or still a Question Mark? 70 vi

11 4.6 Droughts, Floods, Groundwater and Poverty and Gender All Need Attention Uncertainty with Fishery Issues Farmer Education Keeping Pace with Technology Improvements A Network of River Basin Organisations Are We There Yet? Increased Dry Season Flow the Engine That Will Power Expanded Irrigation The Uncertainties of Sediment Reduction Concern about the Effectiveness of the MRC Consultation Procedures Benefit Sharing Lessons from International and Local Experiences Engaging with the Private Sector a New Way of Doing Business? 78 5 THE FORUM OUTCOMES GUIDING THE UPDATED BASIN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Key Messages in Detail Guidance for the BDS Update Implications for MRC Stakeholder Engagement Feed-back on the Forum by participants Recommendations for the next Forum 97 ANNEX A FORUM BOOKLET 100 ANNEX B LIST OF PARTICIPANTS 164 ANNEX C FEEDBACK FROM PARTICIPANTS 178 vii

12 viii

13 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 4 th Regional Stakeholder Forum on the Basin Development Plan took place from November 2014, in Siem Reap, Cambodia. The Forum brought together participants from all main areas of stakeholders within the Mekong Basin, including representatives of the Governments of the Mekong River Commission (MRC) Member Countries and Dialogue Partners, universities, research institutions, NGOs, civil society groups, representatives from communities, river basin organisations, and Development Partners. This 4 th Regional Stakeholder Forum Moving towards Optimal Development of the Mekong River Basin is the latest in an ongoing series of regional multi-stakeholder forums pioneered and organised by the BDP Programme to engage stakeholders at the regional level to provide inputs into planning and decision-making on water and related resources development in the basin. In particular, this Forum provided comment on progress over the last 4 years of the Basin Development Strategy (BDS) and suggested what changes and improvements could be made for a strategy update to cover 2016 to By way of background, The Stakeholder Consultation on MRC s Basin Development Plan (The 1 st Regional Stakeholder Forum) on the BDP was held on March 2008, in Vientiane, Lao PDR. It emphasized the importance of the BDP process being grounded in knowledge of the river, and stressed the need for a thorough understanding of the challenges of implementing Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) across a large multi-country river basin. It debated the suitability of a scenario based approach to assessing possible development options and to answering urgent questions such as: What are the implications of combined nationally planned water resources developments, especially of the mainstream dams and to what extent further development is balanced and mutually beneficial?. The 2 nd Regional Stakeholder Forum, held on October 2009, in Chiang Rai, Thailand, specifically discussed scenario assessment methodologies and the incomplete Consultation Draft 1 of the Basin Development Strategy. This was a very intensive and participatory process. Emanating from the 2 nd Forum was the key question of how the Basin Development Strategy would capture the opportunities and mitigate the risks resulting from current regional development trends and plans. The 3 rd Regional Stakeholder Forum was held on July 2010, in Vientiane, Lao PDR, with the theme of Decoding the development scenarios and Strategy for Basin Development: What does the future hold?. The discussions and messages from the 3 rd Forum helped to define the content and shape of the first Basin Development Strategy that was approved by the MRC Council of ministers in There was a strong statement by the 3 rd Regional Stakeholder Forum that a solid baseline for the ecosystem is needed which demonstrates understanding of how the many ecosystem units and habitats function together, to strengthen the assessment of the environmental impacts of scenarios. Similarly, further improvement of the social assessment of the scenarios is needed, to better understand the real impacts on local communities. ix

14 Also the concept of the Development Opportunity Space was seen as confusing and needed more explanation too complex and is misunderstood by some as a list of endorsed projects that do not give proper consideration to poverty, people and the environment. However, some argued that this was not the case at all if Scenario Packages fall within the Development Opportunity Space this does not signify approval but simply that a first hurdle has been jumped. Its countries want to go further, then the usual pre-feasibility, feasibility and consultation processes must apply. The BDP Team within the Mekong River Commission Secretariat (MRCS) and the four countries worked hard after the 3 rd Forum to take account of the key messages and make adjustments where it was feasible and sensible to do so. The adopted Strategy set out the shared understanding of the development opportunities and associated risks, taking into account developments in the upstream countries of China and Myanmar. The Strategy also establishes strategic priorities to capture development opportunities and minimize risks, and sets out priorities for basin management that seek to make more effective the underpinning processes that support sustainable river basin and water resources management. It moved the previous planning activities to a more action-based strategy and was seen as a change of direction or perhaps more a speeding up of basin planning and development. This change of approach highlighted the need for a comprehensive participation, consultation and communication schedule of events. There have been many meetings at regional and sub-basin levels, and more than $US 2 million has been spent on stakeholder engagement since work on the BDS commenced. This 4 th Regional Stakeholder Forum acknowledged that there has been good progress in most areas of the first BDS. Despite this progress, the MRC, and all key stakeholders in the Lower Mekong Basin, acknowledge that more needs to be done to make subsequent editions of the Basin Development Strategy more robust, more basin-wide in nature, and more inclusive of all the main issues, opportunities and constraints. For example, with the agreement of the riparian countries, the first strategy was based on the cumulative assessment of the existing national water resources development plans no new or significant joint or multi-country projects were included. Yet it has now been shown by preliminary, or exploratory and more wide-ranging and longer term assessments, that concentrating on packages of possible national projects alone will not achieve optimal results for basin sustainability, and for the benefit sharing and cost minimisation. We need to look wider and further that is, basin wide in vision, joint or multi-country projects in scope and provide more attention to environmental baseline indicators and livelihood issues for the marginalised or vulnerable communities. What was very clear from the interactive sessions throughout the Forum is that all levels and groups of stakeholders want more, and especially better, consultation mechanisms with the MRC and Member Countries. The views expressed were many and varied. Of particular concern was what was seen as less than desired stakeholder inputs to the MRC s formal consultation procedures i.e. the Procedures for Notification, Prior Consultation and Agreement (PNPCA). The MRC hears this message points made will be carefully considered in finding the best package of consultation mechanisms that meet the varied needs of the Mekong Basin. However it must be realised and accepted that consultation within a country is a national issue and the systems and processes of each country will determine just how consultation will occur. The MRC can assist by facilitating discussion at the regional level on common grounds and processes for involving stakeholders and civil society, and in return, these stakeholder groups x

15 must respect the right of each country to conduct consultation and participation as is appropriate to its customs and policies. As with the discussions at the 3 rd Forum, scenario formulation and assessment again received high attention. There are those who maintain that not enough emphasis is given to impact areas such as food security, livelihood issues or environmental protection in the scenarios and their assessments, and that quite different result would occur if say, environmental protection was the main focus of the scenarios. Others argue that these impact areas are in fact, the governing or constraining parts of the scenario assessment process and therefore tend to control how a scenario could, or could not, move forwards, and thus have a very large influence. The MRC has looked hard at the planning concepts and methods and there is a strong belief that the scenario approach, now being structured with a wider and further looking perspective for the updated BDS, is still the appropriate approach for long to medium term indicative planning. But what everyone agrees is that we need better information about the stress or behaviour responses of the basin s natural and people resources to development pressures and that closing the key knowledge gaps must be a priority for the next edition of the BDS and probably for many future editions as well. Fisheries, wetlands and sediment behaviour, and development impacts on the livelihoods of the more vulnerable people are four areas where we must give priority, and for example, this should extend to developing innovative and new commercial options for mitigating impacts on the vulnerable communities. And whilst accepting that these priority knowledge gap areas must, and will, be worked on, this focuses on a broader question raised at the Forum, being does the MRC need more information and analytical tools? Some argue that after 15 years or so since the MRC agreement was signed, we have more than enough data and analytical tools for guiding good basin development and management. Others argue that as the basin continues to change, along with the lifestyles and ambitions of its people, we must continue to collect data and create meaningful information from it, so that the various basin assessments and development scenarios are based on the best possible and most current information. No basin organisation in the developed world, ever has all the information and analytical tools that it needs; it is all about doing the best with improved data and tools that are guided by clear priority setting and available funds. The MRC is said to have a much better than average data and information bank and a realistic and effective set of analytical tools. The issue may not be one of costly upgrades right now, but more of ensuring adequate numbers of experts in all the countries are maintained, that can understand and access the information and use the modelling tools and analytical systems. Related to this data, information and tools issue are the comments specifically about whether and how resource optimisation tools are to be used to find the optimal solution for development. Do we have the proper tools and are we using them properly? And what do we mean by optimal development? During and after the Forum, it was argued firstly that optimal development (covered in Articles 1 and 2 of the 1995 Mekong Agreement) should not be seen as some peak or one-off solution. Optimal means the most desirable or favourable, best possible, most advantageous so in a Mekong development sense, it should be understood as the best direction for development. That is, it is not a silver bullet solution where all assessments and analyses point to one specific, clear and peak solution. Some presenters argued that an optimal solution will usually be the result of balancing out detailed analyses using technical tools, high level government discussions about political issues and xi

16 policies, the broad views of stakeholder groups, assessments as to how a development scenario meets regional and national policies and so on. So resource optimisation tools are just part of the story we have a reasonable set of these tools but no doubt we could do better but most importantly we have a participative process, which we commit to broadening and improving, that will work with the information, tools and assessments to produce what we believe will be balanced, acceptable and sustainable results. The Forum greatly appreciated the active and continuing involvement of China a shining light in the overall Mekong Basin cooperation initiatives. There is already intensive communication with the MRC and four Member Countries and technical and water management information is continually being exchanged and this is being strengthened all the time. Central to this information exchange is the beginning of increased dry season flow coming from the upstream hydropower developments in China. Massive investments in irrigation are planned in the Lower Mekong Basin on the basis that these increased flows from upstream will be secure and occur into the future. It is thus very important that protocols, understandings or agreements whatever is appropriate be established between the MRC and China to give some certainty to these enhanced dry season flows. This must be seen as a priority area for joint cooperation. Some raised the issue about the network of River Basin Organisations (RBOs) a priority issue from the 3 rd Forum and argued that the MRC and the updated BDS must do more to promote effective networks as part of the push to highlight best practices and what works and what doesn t. As an extension of this approach, it was mentioned that as more investment occurs in new irrigation, as supported by the enhanced dry season flows from China, there is a corresponding need to improve farmer skills in new irrigation technologies and in water and farm management generally. There may be possibilities here to use the network approach that has been suggested for connecting the various RBO s/sub-basin organisations within the basin. And better and more involvement of the private sector in the BDS both in formulation and implementation were highlighted by a presentation by the International Finance Corporation (a body of the World Bank group). This is a relatively new area for the MRC and BDS and will be given priority in the updated strategy. The MRC will continue keeping basin stakeholders informed of the developments of the Basin Development Strategy. Given the interconnectedness of the river, more efforts are needed for cooperation and coordination among diverse stakeholders. Local knowledge of communities and local non-government groups can assist in contributing to data and information collection and to defining problems and possible solutions. More outreach to the public through stronger partnerships with civil society and the media is needed. However to re-iterate earlier comments, it must be realised and accepted that consultation within a country is a national issue and the policies and practices of each country will determine just how consultation will occur. Notwithstanding, the MRC will give high priority to assessing what should be the best mix of stakeholder engagement mechanisms for the emerging issues of the basin and the varying needs of particular groups. xii

17 KEY MESSAGES AT A GLANCE The Mekong river: globally important and complex. The Mekong River is an important and highly variable, complex system. Its development creates significant risks as well as significant opportunities. Assessing and mitigating these risks requires early action, as solutions will become much more difficult and costly with time. Ripe for joint development and benefit sharing: adequate information exists. Joint management and development, with cost and benefit sharing deals, is essential if the people of the Mekong Basin are to fulfil their aspirations and potential. Early action is possible due to the MRC s wide knowledge base and strong commitment to cooperation and collaboration. Balance basin development and protection. National plans for water resources development are suboptimal at the basin level joint or multi-country projects have potential to increase basin-wide and national benefits and minimise costs but must include broad-based stakeholder engagement at all stages of the project assessment process. Optimal Development Articles 1 and 2 of the 1995 Mekong Agreement. Optimal means the most desirable or favourable, best possible, most advantageous. It is not a one-off solution identified by assessments and analyses, but more likely be the result of balancing analyses with stakeholder inputs, and national policies and objectives all about give and take. Cooperation combines the comparative advantages of different Lower Mekong Basin countries for mutual benefit. All Lower Mekong Basin countries have different national plans and priorities. Joint planning and development can mitigate risks and develop greater opportunities for all parties. The MRC has the mandate in the 1995 Mekong Agreement to identify and promote joint and basin-wide projects. Dialogue Partners: engagement growing and appreciated. The Chinese representative made a clear and welcome commitment to continue and strengthen regular communication, information sharing and technical exchange, and to continue to manage the river sustainably. The Myanmar representative welcomes further cooperation with the MRC. Perceptions matter. Broad-based consensus and common understanding on key Mekong Basin information is still lacking, creating different perceptions and mistrust across stakeholder groups. The MRC must do more it has a key role in building knowledge, providing evidence and raising awareness. Poverty and gender. The Basin Development Strategy should better reflect the imperative of poverty alleviation and gender aspects of development in the short to medium term scenarios and assessments. Sector strategies should also promote food security and pro-poor development. Sediments: an underestimated resource for a productive Mekong Delta. Studies on the Mekong Delta show: (1) sand plays a critical role but is often lacking in management plans and is at the same time a valuable resource for the construction sector, (2) reduced sediment transport due to dams and sand mining are leading to river bed deepening and coastal erosion, (3) nutrient delivery from the river to the delta are already drastically reduced. These findings demonstrate the high sensitivity to change of the Mekong ecosystem. Changes in the Mekong Delta morphology call for immediate attention to better understand and mitigate these trends, including establishment of a detailed basin wide sediment budget. Institutionalized stakeholder engagement. A broader, strengthened form of institutionalized stakeholder engagement is needed to address emerging issues and priorities, and to engage regularly with the MRC and Member Countries. Maybe stakeholder working groups for specific issues or activities; and the private sector are new example. xiii

18 Improving and tightening the draft Basin Development Strategy for In addition to the above points, the preparation of the next draft of the updated Basin Development Strategy could take into account the following suggestions: 1. Incorporate a strategic vision and better defined objectives. 2. Clearly make the BDS a basin strategy prescribing actions to be done, but not mixing strategy and action plan. Write the BDS for policy makers, urging action based on a sense of urgency. 3. The implementation of the BDS for sits uneasily within Chapter 1. Consider a separate, short chapter on the experiences and lessons learnt from the implementation of the previous BDS. Add to this Chapter, the progress of the implementation of the Development opportunities, which is presented in Section Combine Chapter 2 (State of the Basin) with the development outlook in Section 3.1 into a Chapter entitled development trends and outlook. 5. Streamline and further improve the remainder of Chapter 3 (development needs, opportunities and risks), including an assessment of the risks and uncertainties related to infrastructure development. 6. Relate Chapter 4 (Basin Development Strategy), through a new Section 4.1, strongly with the analysis of the needs, opportunities and risks in Chapter Merge the current Sections 4.2 and 4.3 on basin development priorities and basin management priorities. 8. Perceived weaknesses regarding cooperation mechanisms (including the PNPCA) need to be better analysed (in Chapter 3) and addressed in Chapter Strengthen the distribution of responsibilities for implementation in the Strategy, including the role of research organizations. 10. Better describe the monitoring of the Strategy implementation at the basin level through the State of Basin reporting system. xiv

19 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ADB ASEAN BDP BFMS CNMC DOS FAO GMS IWRM LMB LNMC MRC MRCS NGOs PNPCA RBO Asian Development Bank Association of South East Asian Nations Basin Development Plan Programme Basin-wide Fisheries Management and Development Strategy Cambodia National Mekong Committee Development Opportunity Space Food and Agriculture Organisation Greater Mekong Sub-Region Integrated Water Resources Management Lower Mekong Basin Lao National Mekong Committee Mekong River Commission Mekong River Commission Secretariat Non-Governmental Organizations Procedures for Notification, Prior Consultation and Agreement River Basin Organisation xv

20 xvi

21 Chapter 1 Introduction 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The Basin Development Plan Programme The Basin Development Planning (BDP) Programme had its origins in the 1995 Mekong Agreement, which established the Mekong River Commission in its present form. Under this Agreement, the BDP was specified as the general planning tool for the Joint Committee of the Commission to use as a blueprint to identify, categorise and prioritise the projects and programmes to be implemented at the basin level. The BDP Programme began its work with consultation meetings and national workshops in each country, followed by a high-level regional launch in Bangkok in February From the start, stakeholder consultation was central to the planning approach and in early 2002, a regional consultation workshop was held to develop a Public Participation Strategy for the MRC. This first phase of the BDP had two aims: To establish a planning process at national and regional levels that will enable the Lower Mekong countries to jointly plan the development of the river basin, and To produce a regionally-owned basin development plan based on an agreed strategy and project ideas that have emerged from joint discussions. To provide the widest possible input to the development of a planning process, ten sub-areas comprising clusters of catchments were defined and discussions held with local representatives from government agencies and the local communities/stakeholders. This emphasises the focus that the BDP has had from the start, on stakeholder participation. This first phase of planning (BDP1) made good progress towards its aims and objectives but it was realised that planning processes and tools, improved knowledge and modelling systems and the building of relationships, whilst important and necessary, are insufficient by themselves for effective cooperation and collaboration. What was needed were national and joint development projects more action and outcomes to build on the knowledge and planning processes. This gave direction to how the next phase of the Basin Development Plan Programme should proceed. It began in 2007 and was designed to address the need for more action. It provided an integrated basin perspective, and set out to build consensus among the riparian governments and stakeholders on the common directions for sustainable development and management. And to be action oriented which, by its nature, is all about strategy, priority activities, targets and indicators. And to agree on a number of strategic priorities to capture development opportunities and minimise uncertainty and risks associated with them, and to work on important basin management processes and procedures that would help deliver effective, sustainable river basin management. And to achieve all of these aspects came the need for a Basin Development Strategy. 1

22 Chapter 1 Introduction 1.2 The Basin Development Strategy (BDS) Strategy an action blueprint aimed at achieving specific goals. Moving from the previous planning activities to an action-based strategy was seen as a change of direction or perhaps more a speeding up of basin planning and development and again highlighted the need for a comprehensive participation, consultation and communication schedule of events. There have been many meetings at regional and sub-basin levels, and more than $US 2 million has been spent on stakeholder engagement since work on the BDS commenced. There have been at least nine categories of engagement events, with the number of participants ranging from 20 up to 350 for the big regional consultations. There have been three such regional forums before this present 4 th Regional Stakeholder Forum. The BDP has been a pioneer in broader stakeholder engagement at the MRC. The 1 st Regional Stakeholder Consultation on the BDP was held in March 2008, in Vientiane, Lao PDR. It emphasized the importance of the BDP process being grounded in knowledge of the river, and stressed the need for a thorough understanding of the challenges of implementing Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) across a large multi-country river basin. It debated the suitability of a scenario based approach to assess possible development options and to answer urgent questions such as: What are the implications of combined nationally planned water resources developments, especially of the mainstream dams and to what extent further development is balanced and mutually beneficial?. The 2 nd Regional Stakeholder Forum, held on October 2009, in Chiang Rai, Thailand, specifically discussed scenario assessment methodologies and the incomplete Consultation Draft 1 of the Basin Development Strategy. This was a very intensive and participatory process. Emanating from the 2nd Forum was the key question of how the Basin Development Strategy would capture the opportunities and mitigate the risks resulting from current regional development trends and plans. The 3 rd Regional Stakeholder Forum was held on July 2010, in Vientiane, Lao PDR with the theme of Decoding the development scenarios and Strategy for Basin Development: What does the future hold? The objectives of the Forum were: To discuss the results of the basin-wide scenario assessments, To discuss the draft IWRM-based Basin Development Strategy and provide inputs for decision-making by the Lower Mekong Basin countries, To facilitate a critical dialogue on the future of River Basin Organizations (RBO s) in the Lower Mekong Basin to support the implementation of the Basin Development Strategy, and To continue strengthening partnerships between the MRC and stakeholders. The following were some of the key messages (not all) that came from the 3 rd Stakeholder Forum: Regional A solid baseline for the ecosystem is needed which demonstrates understanding of how the many ecosystem units and habitats function together, to strengthen the assessment of the environmental impacts of scenarios. Similarly, further improvement 2

23 Chapter 1 Introduction of the social assessment of the scenarios is needed, to better understand the real impacts on local communities. The concept of the development opportunity space should be revisited. The concept was seen as being too complex and is misunderstood by some as a list of projects that do not give serious consideration to poverty and the environment. Some argued that a development space driven by ecological and livelihoods limits, or food security issues would produce quite different scenarios, whilst others argued that, in fact, the present approach of assessing scenarios for a range of water related developments and testing these against broad environmental and social factors is quite appropriate for a developing basin and for the early pre-feasibility stage of projects that the scenarios cover. The Strategy offers an opportunity for the MRC to work with the four countries to strengthen existing RBOs, establish new ones and create a network of basin/subbasin/watershed level organisations in the LMB to share successes, help resolve problems and to promote best practices. The BDP Team within the MRCS and the four Member Countries worked hard after the 3 rd Regional Stakeholder Forum to take account of the key messages and make adjustments where it was feasible and sensible to do so. This all led to a milestone achievement in the history of Mekong cooperation, when the Governments of Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Viet Nam in January 2011 adopted their first ever Basin Development Strategy. The Strategy sets out the shared understanding of the development opportunities and associated risks, taking into account developments in the upstream countries of China and Myanmar. The Strategy also establishes strategic priorities to capture development opportunities and minimize risks, and sets out priorities for basin management that seek to make more effective the underpinning processes that support sustainable river basin and water resources management. The Strategy is being implemented through a Regional Action Plan (RAP) coordinated by the MRCS, and four complementary National Indicative Plans (NIPs), one per country. Since 2011, approximately 20 tributary hydropower projects and two hydropower projects on the mainstream have moved from the planning stage to the implementation stage. Flood protection and river training are being taken up at many locations along the mainstream. The expansion of the irrigated area has been however limited. These development projects have followed national preparation and approval processes and, in several instances, have been subject also to regional assessment and the MRC Procedures, such as the Procedures for Notification, Prior Consultation and Agreement (PNPCA). Despite this progress and the range of achievements, the MRC, and all key stakeholders in the LMB, acknowledge that more needs to be done to make subsequent editions of the Basin Development Strategy more robust, and more inclusive of all the main issues, opportunities and constraints. For example, as decided by the four countries, the initial Strategy was based on a cumulative assessment of the existing national water resources development plans of the Mekong Basin countries and did not include any new, significant joint or multi-country projects. Under this approach, for instance, major environmental assets in the Mekong basin were not specifically protected, as baseline studies to determine acceptable limits on environmental values, and indicators to define these limits, had not been completed. Similarly, little protection against extreme floods was in place for the densely populated Mekong Delta. Moreover, the benefits from basin development were not viewed, by some, as equitably distributed. 3

24 Chapter 1 Introduction The Strategy results so far, plus these limitations that have emerged of the current Strategy, provided the backdrop for this 4 th Regional Stakeholder Forum: What new basin-wide development scenarios could and should be formulated, what benefit sharing options could be considered in a four-country basin such as the Lower Mekong Basin, how could more focus be given to seeking optimal and sustainable development that maximises mutual benefits and minimises transboundary costs and impacts. 4

25 Chapter 1 Introduction 5

26 th Chapter 2 The 4 Regional Stakeholders Forum 6

27 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum 2 THE 4 TH REGIONAL STAKEHOLDERS FORUM 2.1 Objectives and anticipated outcomes Under the overall theme of Moving towards optimal development of the Mekong River Basin, the objectives of the 4 th Regional Stakeholder Forum were: 1. To review the implementation of the current Basin Development Strategy How do stakeholder perceptions of ongoing basin development compare with MRC reviews of the implementation of the Strategy? How can mutual understanding be increased? 2. To discuss the assessment of development trends, needs and opportunities in the Mekong Basin in the medium and long term What are the needs, opportunities and risks in the future in the context of providing basin-wide energy, food and flood security and resilience against climate change? How can the benefits from basin development be increased while minimizing adverse impacts? 3. To provide broad feedback and inputs to the updating of the Basin Development Strategy Will the proposed updated strategic priorities lead to optimal development and increased levels of cooperation and regional integration? What should be the role of the MRC, national agencies and broader stakeholders (other regional initiatives, private sectors, and civil society) in the implementation of these priorities? The Forum consisted of five sessions within the first two days and a field visit on the third day. Plenary sessions provided information related to the ongoing implementation of the Basin Development Strategy and the longer-term development needs and opportunities and associated risks to prepare participants for the more in-depth discussion of strategic topics during the parallel sessions. The Forum was specifically designed to be interactive and structured around dialogues, using presentations to catalyse discussions. An initial plenary session set the scene for the discussions, followed by three parallel topic sessions Results from Implementation of the current Basin Development Strategy, Assessment of Benefit sharing options and Updating the Basin Development Strategy that dug deeper into strategic basin development issues. The results of the parallel sessions were discussed in a plenary session. Key messages from the event were identified and formulated with support from the Forum and session facilitators and rapporteurs, and from a panel of representatives from the MRC Member Countries, civil society organisations, and Development Partners. 7

28 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum From these presentations and discussions, it was expected that the Forum would produce two main outcomes: 1. Shared knowledge and understanding increased of how the basin s water and related resources can be developed and managed considering realistic long-term needs, opportunities and risks. 2. Inputs gained from the assembled stakeholders on the approach to strategic basin planning, including key messages from the Forum to be considered by Government representatives during their discussions and negotiation of the updated Basin Development Strategy (for ). These proceedings provide summary of the Forum and aims: To serve as a reference for both the Forum s participants and other stakeholders interested in the BDP process, To build a good understanding of the LMB and the complexities being addressed by the BDP process, other MRC activities and other stakeholders activities, and To summarise the key messages from the various presentations and relevant discussions. 2.2 Hosts, facilitators, speakers and participants The 4 th Regional Stakeholder Forum was hosted by the Royal Government of Cambodia, through the Cambodia National Mekong Committee, in collaboration with the Mekong River Commission. The Forum was mainly facilitated by Dr. Sokhem Pech. In addition, there were three parallel sessions, which were assisted by: 1. Dr. Matthew McCartney as Facilitator and Mr. Phetsamone Southalack as Rapporteur for parallel session of Results from Implementation of the Basin Development Strategy, with the objective of discussing the implementation of the current Basin Development Strategy by the Member Countries and other actors in the Mekong Basin; 2. Mr. Henrik Larsen as Facilitator and Dr. Paradis Someth as Rapporteur for parallel session of Assessment of Benefit Sharing Options, with the objective of discussing the international and Mekong experience in benefit sharing, and discussing the limitations of the existing cumulative assessment of national plans and contribute to new development scenarios aimed at optimal development and regional benefit sharing in the Mekong basin; 8

29 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum 3. Ms. Klomjit Chandrapanya as Facilitator and Mr. Detsada Soukhaseum as Rapporteur for parallel session of Updating of the Basin Development Strategy, with the objective of discussing the emerging strategic priorities and actions for Mekong Basin development and management and contribute to their improvement. There were about 250 speakers and participants from the Governments of the MRC Member Countries and Dialogue Partners, universities and research institutions, private sectors, NGOs, civil society groups, representatives from national and regional communities, River Basin Organisations, and Development Partners. The titles of presentation, name of speakers and panelists were in the agenda of the Forum, which is presented in Annex A Forum booklet. The detail of the participants can be found in Annex B List of participants. 2.3 Photo exhibition The photo exhibition with theme of the Changing Face of the Mekong Region, was organised in eight areas of (1) Fisheries, (2) Flood Protection and Embankment, (3) Hydropower and Electricity, (4) Industry and Sediment Extraction, (5) Agriculture and Irrigation, (6) Navigation, Trade and Bridget, (7) Tourism,and (8) Urbanisation. 9

30 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum Fisheries The Mekong River is enriched with a remarkable diversity of fish, and fishing is a main source of food and income in rural parts of Lower Mekong Basin. Fish are often injected with hormones to stimulate spawning and induce reproduction. Freshwater fish plays a large part in the diet of many people in the Lower Mekong Basin. Drying fish in the open air is a common practice in the Mekong countries. Fishing is one of the main activities in the Lower Mekong River, where fishermen still use the traditional wooden traps known as Li. This traditional practice, among other things, poses a challenge for the sustainability of Mekong fisheries. 10

31 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum Flood Protection and Embankment Seasonable flooding can bring benefits. However severe flooding can result in the tragic loss of life, damage to property and infrastructure in cities, and disruption of social and economic activities. Flood management efforts include embankment protection along the banks of the Mekong River. Flood protection and embankment projects can hold back the damaging storm surges and flood waters that affect the most vulnerable areas of the Lower Mekong Basin. 11

32 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum Hydropower and Electricity The Lower Mekong Basin is one of the most active regions in the world for hydropower development. Largely completed in Thailand and Viet Nam, hydropower development is now proceeding in Lao PDR and Cambodia. Power is a key source that can be harnessed from nature and traded across borders. Mekong countries with large hydropower resources can generate national revenue from exports and offer energy for the region s development. Building dams can also affect the riverine environment and the vulnerable people depending on them. Access to modern energy is uneven across the Lower Mekong Basin and hydropower development can help bridge the gap between availability and unequal access, part of the regional connectivity agenda under the GMS and ASEAN. 12

33 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum Industry and Sediment Extraction Sand dredging is increasing in parts of the Lower Mekong River to fuel rapid development Gravel and sand extraction is adding to the challenge of reduction of sediments trapped by dams flowing down the Mekong River. 13

34 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum Agriculture and Irrigation Mekong countries have big plans for irrigated agriculture. It is usually one of the first options for raising living standards, improving livelihoods and mitigating poverty. Improved irrigation practices benefit from the use of appropriate techniques such as these sluice gates on the Nam Kham River Basin Development Operation and Maintenance Project. The development of saline resistant rice is part of the efforts to ensure the sustainability of agriculture and adapt to climate change in vulnerable areas of the Lower Mekong Basin such as the Mekong Delta. 14

35 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum Navigation, Trade and Bridget The Mekong River will be even more important for the movement of people and goods within and between the basin s countries. Trade along the river generates economic benefits; but also challenges such as increased traffic, pollution from ships, possible oil spills, and safety risks for river users if not properly regulated. Shipping activity continues to increase across the Mekong River and port infrastructure is being expanded to accommodate expected growth. Here, workers unload trucks and load produce, from India, onto a Chinese cargo boat at the New Port in Chiang Saen. 15

36 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum Cross border trade and transport has increased dramatically in the Lower Mekong Basin bridging the economic divides between the riparian countries and opening new channels for development and regional integration. Cranes take coal imported from Indonesia and load it into trucks at a new port, on a branch of the Mekong River in the Mekong Delta. 16

37 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum Tourism The Lower Mekong Basin is blessed with unique wetlands of international importance, also known as Ramsar sites, which attract tourists from around the world. The Lower Mekong Basin is one of the most naturally diverse and attractive regions in the world. The growth rate in tourism has increased as more and more international and intraregional visitors are expected to travel throughout the Lower Mekong Basin. The cultural diversity and traditions of the Mekong countries are a source of pride for their people and an opportunity to generate income through tourism. 17

38 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum Urbanisation The region s urban centres show clear signs of rapid development that contrast with the traditional image of the peaceful countryside. The countries growing cities are driving the region s economic growth. The redevelopment of riverbanks is part of the urbanisation trends in the Lower Mekong Basin that includes a shift away from agriculture to more diversified economies. 18

39 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum 2.4 Field trips The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum accompanied by two field trips: (1) Visit to Angkor Hydraulic System and Traditional Water Management, and (2) Visit to Kampong Phluk Floating Village in the Tonle Sap Lake. Trip 1: Angkor Hydraulic System and Traditional Water Management The history of water resources development in Cambodia dates back to the Angkorean era 1 when the Khmer Empire was in her golden time. The Khmer Empire flourished between the 9 th and 14 th centuries, during which the Kings of Angkor constructed many hydraulic infrastructures throughout the region, such as roads, dikes, canals, moats, pond and large reservoirs. It is believed that those infrastructures were not only for, decorative and ceremonial purpose, but also for rice farming purpose. The ancient Khmer city of Angkor was the largest pre-industrial metropolis in the world, with a population near 1 million. The city spread over an area of more than 300 km 2 (figure above 2 ), which made possible by a sophisticated technology for managing and harvesting water for use during the dry season, including diverting a major river through the heart of the city. 1 The history of Khmer water resources development is believed to start earlier than the Angkorean era, however, reliable source of information on the water resources development is not available. 2 Evans, D., Pottier, C., Fletcher, R., Hensley, S., Tapley, I., Milne, A., Barbetti, M., A comprehensive archaeological map of the world s largest preindustrial settlement complex at Angkor, Cambodia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), PNAS 104 (36),

40 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum Many of the reservoirs and walls of canals were constructed of compacted earth, but junctions and other crucial points in the system were sophisticated stone structures. The Khmer built, e.g. a massive stone structure to divert the Siem Reap River from its old bed through the centre of the city. Other sites have stone structures built into the wall to manage the inflow and outflow of water. The system was complex enough that the Khmer could have grown rice throughout the year and not just during the rainy season. Furthermore, water plays a role very important in the stability of temple especially the groundwater because all the temples in the Angkor Park are built on the sand layer and the resistance of sand is depend on its degree of saturation and the sand layer has direct connection with the groundwater and the Moats. Angkor was therefore recognized as the Hydraulic City as proposed in and later inscribed on the World Heritage List in Trip 2: Kampong Phluk Floating Village on the floodplain of the Tonle Sap Lake Kampong Phluk, means Harbor of the Tusks in Khmer, is a village of stilted houses built within the floodplain of the Tonle Sap Lake. The houses are built on stilts to prevent flooding during the rainy season. During the dry season when the lake level is low, the buildings in the villages seem to soar atop their 6-meter stilts. At this time of year, many of the villagers move out onto the lake and build temporary houses. In the wet season, when water level rises, the villagers move back to their permanent houses on the floodplain. The livelihood options of the villagers are limited to fishing and eco-tourism, which rely heavily on rich biodiversity generated by the flow regime of the Tonle Sap Lake. It is therefore important to understand behaviours of the flow regime of the lake. The Tonle Sap Lake, means freshwater lake in Khmer, was formed about years ago 4. It is the largest permanent freshwater lake in Southeast Asia. The Tonle Sap Lake connects to the Mekong River via the Tonle Sap River. The lake rises and falls according to seasons. Differences between the water level in the Tonle Sap Lake and the Mekong River cause the unique flow reversal in the Tonle Sap River. In June, the start of rainy season, the water level of the Mekong mainstream begins to rise as snowmelt from the Himalayan Mountains and monsoon rains swell the Mekong River system. The lake absorbs water from the Mekong River. As a result, the lake area gets 6 times bigger from 2,500 km 2 in dry season to 15,000 km 2 during the flood with water volume varying from 1.5 km 3 to 70 km 3 and water 3 Groslier, B.P., La cité hydraulique angkorienne: exploitation ou surexploitation. Bulletin de l Ecole Francaise d Extreme-Orient 66, Carbonnel, J.P., Guiscafré, J., Grand Lac du Cambodge: sédimentologie et hydrologie Musée National d Histoire Naturelle de Paris, Paris. 20

41 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum depth rising from 1 m to 9 m. In November, when the rains cease, water flows out of the lake. Such a large flow reversal exists nowhere else in the world. The unique flow reversal is possible because of the flat lowland throughout Central Cambodia. 2.5 The forum webpage A webpage was specifically created to communicate to and to get feedback from the public, Forum s participants and other stakeholders before and after the Forum. Before the Forum, the webpage is a place, where information relating the Forum was posted, including forum programme and format, materials used during the forum, logistic arrangement and online registration. After the Forum, the webpage served as a platform, where all presentations and key message of the Forum can be downloaded, and for collecting feedback from the public on the update of Basin Development Strategy for Link to the webpage: 21

42 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum 22

43 Chapter 2 The 4 th Regional Stakeholders Forum 23

44 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations 24

45 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations 3 REVIEW OF THE FORUM PRESENTATIONS 3.1 Session 1: Opening Remarks H.E. Mr. Kim Kean Hor, Minister of Water Resources and Meteorology, Chair of Cambodia National Mekong Committee and MRC Council Member, welcomed participants to the Forum. The Minister remarked that the role of the MRC in coordinating the basin planning has already a long history and that the MRC Member Countries are continuing to work together with positive progress on the River Mekong and its resources. He thanked the Development Partners for their support. 25

46 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations The Minister briefly looked back at the 3 rd Regional Stakeholder Forum in 2010 when the draft of the first MRC Basin Development Strategy (BDS) was discussed. Much was learned from the participants at that 3 rd Forum and soon after, the MRC Council approved the first BDS which was in many respects, a milestone in moving MRC cooperation more into an action phase. Since then implementation has started and the strategy strongly supports regional cooperation and integration. The knowledge gaps have been reduced. However there are still limitations that have to be addressed, e.g. how can the countries improve their national plans, taking into account transboundary impacts, how to develop sustainable hydropower, or how to deal with climate change. The mainstream dams are subject to debate as are topics like trade-offs and benefit sharing. The Minister concluded by saying that these challenges require a framework of action to fulfil the MRC mission for optimal and sustainable development of the basin. And this next version of the BDS will provide this necessary framework and promote the multi-country collaboration between the riparian countries that is crucial for optimizing benefits across the basin and minimizing costs and impacts. Mr Hans Guttman, Chief Executive Officer, MRCS, also recalled the 3 rd Regional Stakeholder Forum, when the first BDS was presented. He said that whilst the first BDS of 2011 is a milestone in MRC cooperation, we must remember that development in the basin already had a long history. It is not a blank sheet there have been national irrigation schemes and tributary dams constructed throughout the basin for decades, and in this development process, it has been inevitable that the environment has been affected. But there is still time to preserve the essential wealth of natural resources and the BDS seeks to do this through better knowledge on natural and human resource behaviour, and balancing this with the benefits that come with water related developments, particularly those of a joint or multicountry nature. be negotiated. The future is about cooperation, collaboration, and basin-wide IWRM and developing a mix of joint or multi-country and national projects of basin-wide significance, so that benefits are maximised, and costs and impacts are minimised. That is how to balance implementation of national plans with broad scope of the basin-wide strategy and its coverage of joint projects. Ongoing knowledge development, exploratory scenario analysis looking way out into the long term (year 2060), benefit and cost sharing, and the MRC Council Study, will increase our understanding of the basin and support sustainable development. Different views will have to be brought together and development options will have to All this means a new phase of cooperation and collaboration one where maximising and balancing, both mutual and national benefits and minimising transboundary impacts becomes the primary focus of joint discussions and debate. The updated BDS will guide these 26

47 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations discussions and take the Mekong Basin development further down the path of sustainable development. To build on these opening remarks, a panel of senior officials from the countries took questions and also briefly explored past, present and emerging issues under the heading of The MRC and Water Resources Development. The following are summary of the discussion: The question was raised What is meant by Optimal Development? It is in the title of the Forum but its interpretation is unclear. How does the MRC want to achieve it? In response during and after the Forum, it was pointed out that optimal development is covered by the Articles 1 and 2 of the 1995 Mekong Agreement, and should be understood as the best direction for development. Optimal meaning the most desirable or favourable, best possible, most advantageous. It is about optimising sustainable development for mutual and multiple benefits. That is, it is not a silver bullet solution where all assessments and analyses point to one specific, clear and peak solution. An optimal solution will usually be the result of balancing out detailed analyses using resource optimisation tools, high level government discussions, inputs from wide stakeholder groups, assessments as to how a development scenario meets regional and national policies and objectives, what will be the acceptable impacts and so on. In the Mekong situation all of these factors will be considered at the four national levels as well as at the regional level so there will always be much debate as to what is the best approach towards optimal development and where the optimal solution to a development package will sit. Are we equipped with the tools and knowledge to advise what should be the optimal solution? We have some, but not all tools, and there is work to be done. Resource allocation modelling will not give the answer but will provide good information to assist the decision makers; the outcome will, as always, be the result of negotiation, and a mix of give and take. The better the information and assessments that we can 27

48 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations provide to decision makers, the more balanced, better and acceptable will be the outcomes. Each country will be different; the Lao PDR representative on the panel suggested that we need a practical way for optimal development. You cannot put everything in a computer model, in the real situation there are many things that you cannot predict so it has to come down to looking at the analyses and then having discussions and negotiations. Each country has to look at its own approach to optimal development. It depends on the situation in each country; if Lao PDR has good conditions for hydropower, it should go for it. If Cambodia has better conditions for food production, than that should be their aim. But always take into account sustainability. Should China be a full member of the MRC? China stated that it already has intensive communication with the MRC and the four Member Countries and technical and water management information is continually being exchanged and this is being strengthened all the time. The issues and roles from upstream and downstream in the Mekong Basin are not equal and sharing information are the essential tasks right now, and this is occurring in an open and cooperative manner, and is strengthening all the time. As to where the MRC is doing well in its cooperation role, we are achieving much more now in joint water management and policy/procedure development, and also in reducing transboundary risks related to flooding, navigation, water quality, etc. As far as information is concerned, there is a lot available, we are not in a bad shape, but we need to close knowledge gaps and the updated BDS will have this as a priority. For the future, cooperation with the Development Partners could be improved, as with ASEAN and GMS. And we need to support the Member Countries in the transition of the MRC to become financially independent of donor support. Which direction the cooperation/collaboration should go depends on what is important for the different Member Countries. Hydropower may be high priority for one, irrigation development and food security for another, flood protection and management for another, climate change and impacts on coastal processes for another. We have to respect each other, and this is why there is no simple answer to what package of projects can be called optimal development. Respect is a key factor, we have to be willing to share information. These Regional Stakeholder Forums are a good example, they bring people together. Participation with stakeholders is very important in the BDP process. To many in the basin, the concepts of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) and basin sustainability remain a mystery. They certainly should be the basis upon which the BDS is structured as, for the expert basin planners and managers, IWRM/sustainability provide clear guidance as to how to undertake assessments and evaluations that move toward a balanced set of economic, environmental and social outcomes. However, water planners and managers must be careful not to leave behind the wider basin community as they develop planning options that seek sustainable development. Consultation where the concepts, results and outcomes are unclear and not well understood is not consultation at all. 28

49 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations 3.2 Session 2: Getting engaged Setting the scene Reviewing past, current and future issues, activities and plans in the Lower and Upper Mekong Basin. Dr. Anoulak Kittikhoun, BDP Programme Coordinator, MRCS, presented on Impacts of the Current Basin Development Strategy. He gave a summary of how the first BDS was structured and how it was based around a development opportunity space and 15 strategic basin management and development priorities that defined the key areas that needed to be worked on, so that any development decisions would be based on strength and certainty of both benefits and impacts. He stressed that these 15 priorities are complementary, in that those relating to basin management will guide and support those for basin development, through protection of natural resources, strengthening basin processes and related institutional development and capacity building. Progress on implementation of development opportunities in key areas has been mixed over the last 4 years Irrigation opportunities that use the increased dry season flows from the upstream dams in China exist in Northeast Thailand and Cambodia. As well, these flows can help combat saline intrusion in the Mekong Delta. However so far irrigated agriculture has expanded only modestly, but for tributary hydropower, some 20 tributary projects moved from the planning to the implementation stage. On the mainstream, one dam has moved to implementation whilst a second is in the prior consultation phase. And a range of flood protection and river training works are being constructed. The strategic basin management and development priorities are being implemented through a Basin Action Plan that has two parts; a Regional Action Plan, implemented through MRC programs; 70% of these activities are being implemented, and, National Indicative Plans, implemented by relevant Line Agencies in the Member Countries; 40% of these activities are being implemented. The presenter gave more details about the progress of these strategic priorities such as strengthened cooperation with China, agreement on protecting the baseline for dry season flows, the improved sustainability of hydropower development (identifying ecologically sensitive sub-basins, evaluating benefit sharing options for tributary hydropower, implementing design guidance for mainstream dams, etc.), adapting to climate change, establishing basin objectives and strategies for water related sectors, developing economic and environmental and social objectives and indicators for basin management. 29

50 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations To summarise progress of the first BDS: The BDS moved MRC cooperation from primarily knowledge creation and sharing, to cooperation on real basin development and management issues. It balances development and protection by providing development opportunities while setting priorities to avoid and manage risks. There has been a start in harmonising regional and national level planning. There has been a reduction in knowledge gaps, particularly in sediment and nutrient trapping, in implications of reductions in capture fisheries, social and livelihood impacts of various developments, and climate change risks and adaption needs. BUT, the initial BDS does not comprehensively address future needs, or respond adequately to the water-food-energy-flood nexus (but perhaps it was not appropriate to go this far in a first edition of the BDS). NOR, did it strategically link to a regional, integrated development agenda that included joint actions and basin wide projects but again, a first edition of a BDS had to focus more on the art of the possible and not reach out to far and away from existing national planning processes and approved plans. Mr Ton Lennaerts, BDP International Technical Advisor, MRCS, presented on Assessment of Development Trends and Long-term Outlook for the Mekong. The presentation looked at the present and emerging trends for a number of key water related areas and also the outlook for factors such as fertility rates, national economic growth, reduction in poverty, and loss of wetland areas. These trends provide a long to medium term view of the pressures on the basin s resources and an understanding of the development needs, opportunities and risks for the overall region, and for the four countries, as they face changing socio-economic conditions. Priorities and short and medium term actions can then be framed within these longer term regional and national perspectives and included in successive future national plans. 30

51 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations These trends, together with national and regional economic, social and environmental perspectives, provide a picture of the longer term development needs. These include: Meeting basic needs of food and livelihood security, Resilience against severe floods and droughts, Environmental protection, Ensuring energy security, and Providing accessibility for people and goods through improved transportation. Are these longer term needs properly covered or dealt with in the various national plans, or in the first BDS? The first BDS was based on the cumulative assessment of the four countries national plans that is, the contents of the national plans were basically added together in a variety of combinations to create various scenarios and these were evaluated for benefits and related impacts and costs. A review since the BDS was approved has suggested that whilst the plans will produce substantial economic benefits, there would also be significant transboundary environmental impacts. Also the collection of projects in the national plans will not necessarily address the longer term needs mentioned above. That is, basing the future development options on the collection of present national plans and their projects, could result in sub-optimal basin development. To overcome, or at least reduce these deficiencies in the planning approach, the updated BDS will need to focus on further reducing knowledge gaps, and on undertaking joint research, investigation and assessment of alternative basin-wide development scenarios that look into the future (that is, focusing more on longer term, joint, multi-country projects rather than just national plans), and most importantly, identifying realistic options for regional benefit sharing that can go hand in hand with the creation of joint projects (as is practiced in other basins). How to look far enough into the future to provide a realistic picture? The updated BDS will first develop exploratory scenarios for the long term (year 2060) and then based on the insights and guidance that these results provide, develop alternative scenarios for the medium term (year 2030) and evaluate these against an improved range of impact indicators and benefit sharing concepts. The expectation from all this is that if the results show significant increases in national benefits (from more of a joint approach rather than just the traditional national unilateral approach) and as well, show decreases in transboundary impacts, then countries will have a strong case to adjust national plans to include a more joint, basin wide approach. Ms. Qiuchi Shi, Deputy Director-General, Department of Water Resources, China, presented on the Development of Water Resources in the Lancang (Upper Mekong) River Basin. The presenter gave an overview of China s cooperation with the MRC and the four Member Countries and focused on current efforts for improving cooperation, and for developing more effective communication links with the MRC. For the future, it was emphasised that China was keen to further advance cooperation with a focus on the enhancement of reservoir operation to reduce impacts on the ecosystem, to provide continuous flood information and emerging hydrological information to the MRC, and to continually share technology and management experiences relating to all aspects of water resources management. 31

52 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations In response to questions, the presenter said that even though China is not a full member of the MRC, communication with the MRC countries never stops and will continue to improve through the better sharing of technical and water management data and information. As to whether there will be operational rules or infrastructure to minimize low flow impacts of the Chinese dams on the environment, it was said that a small group is working on this topic. The present operational systems are designed to operate the power stations in harmony with the environment. Dr. Naruepon Sukumasavin, Director of Planning, MRCS, discussed the Updated Basin Development Strategy for He gave an overview of the first BDS and showed how it responded to the goals, objectives and underlying principles of the 1995 Mekong Agreement. He emphasised that the Agreement specified Cooperation to optimise multiple use and mutual benefits, and also that there was an emphasis and preference on joint and/or basin wide development. This gave strong support for MRC s focus in the updated strategy on optimal and sustainable development, joint projects and mutual benefits. There was a general view that the first BDS had perceived weaknesses in regard to these principles of optimising and creating mutual benefits and so on. In reaching this conclusion about weaknesses it is important to understand the rationale for formulating the particular development scenarios that were included in the first BDS. The four countries debated the concept of scenarios and how they provide a picture of the future, and agreed to base the scenarios of possible future developments on combinations of the projects and activities that were then included in the four national water related development plans. That is, the scenarios were specifically confined to combinations of projects and activities that had already been identified within the four national planning processes. This was a perfectly reasonable and sensible approach for the first move into scenario planning it gave answers to the obvious question: What are the impacts, both benefits and costs, if the four countries go ahead and implement their national water related development plans? 32

53 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations Further work done over the last 2 years on scenario impacts has shown that by focusing the scenarios on packages of projects/activities from national plans does not necessarily create optimal outputs in terms of maximising benefits and minimising costs and impacts. The updated BDS tasks the MRC to explore a range of joint or multi-country projects within the scenarios and also will look further into the future. It will focus activities in the scenarios to ensure water, energy, food and flood security are well covered, to protect key environmental assets, to better contribute to regional cooperation and integration, and to increase national benefits and minimise transboundary impacts. The main elements of the updated strategy will be: A summary of current status and trends, A long term (2060) outlook of development needs, opportunities and risks, The identification of development opportunities for both basin and national implementation, Medium term strategic priorities (10 to 20 years) to optimise opportunities and minimise risks, Near term strategic actions (for each strategic priority) to be undertaken by the MRC over the next 5 years (to 2020), and How the strategy will be implemented. More details of the assessment work underpinning the strategy and the priority areas identified for improved basin development and management are given in the presentations in Session 3c. The strategy will continue to be implemented at both regional and national levels. National agencies, RBO s and the private sector are expected to work together to capture the priority development opportunities whilst regional and academic organisations, and NGO s can contribute to building knowledge and monitoring positive and negative impacts. Comments/Questions/Suggestions covering the four presentations in Session 2 Getting Engaged The present draft of the updated BDS does not address sufficiently certain issues of importance, particularly drought management. There is a lot of work to be done in Northeast Thailand for example, but we have to rely on national data, not much information is coming from the MRCS. The MRCS accepts that drought management is not prominent in the BDS and that more work and discussions are needed. This will occur during the ongoing consultations before finalising the updated strategy. Whilst it is agreed that more flood protection studies and work is needed in the Mekong Delta, more studies are needed upstream as well, as the prediction of floods is still unreliable. Figures given on aquaculture production in Viet Nam are higher than the capture fisheries production. This was said to be impossible, since for the production of every kg of aquaculture fish, 1.3 kg capture fish as feed is needed to guarantee good quality. 33

54 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations In response it was stated that these figures refer to official statistics presented by the Governments, and elaborated by FAO. These will need more rigorous checking. As to how to strike a balance between development and impacts, this will be addressed by further scenario assessment exercise, in which the scenarios will be judged against a set of agreed criteria. The results will be presented in tables and discussed at forums and during negotiation. Some impacts will be acceptable, some will not. Concern was expressed about the tradeoffs between economic development and ecological protection, and between mainstream and tributary impacts. Also it was argued that in fact, the natural storage in the basin is not low, as presented; the Tonle Sap Lake is considered a huge natural storage and some participants argued that may well be that the serious incision of the riverbed in Cambodia and Viet Nam may negatively affect the storage behaviour of the lake, although there were counter views to this point. How can the private sector be attracted to invest in sustainable development opportunities? Groundwater does not seem to have been mentioned, yet it could play an important role in the future, particularly for small water use schemes and in dry times. In regard to the future distribution of river basin management functions between the MRCS, and the Member Countries and their Line Agencies, various options have been assessed and the preferred approach has been included in the MRC Roadmap and been approved by the MRC Council. Concerning the sectoral programmes of the MRC and whether there is any unnecessary overlap with activities of ASEAN, GMS etc., there is to be ongoing dialogue to enhance synergies between these similar programs and to reduce duplications, e.g. in the field of transportation and environment. As to the State of the Basin (SOB) report, one participant mentioned that it would not be possible to include information from the next SOB into the BDS update as the next monitoring report would not be available until 2018 well after the BDS update is completed. This is true so what will occur is that the BDS priorities and the overall knowledge improvements will allow us to revise the important key indicators and then include these into the SOB structure. This will create a better set of indicators and once we have agreement to the revised MRC Indicator Framework we will have a consistent format for indicator monitoring in all following SOB reports. The need for enhanced or increased regional cooperation is mentioned in the draft BDS update. This relates directly to the broader basin wide focus in this BDS update 34

55 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations and the inclusion of various joint projects and studies in the medium term scenarios. This will require new approaches to regional consultation that tie in with national policies and consultation processes. Cooperation has to increase with increasing challenges that come from seeking a broader basin-wide and joint project approach. Implementation of the MRC Procedures will become more complicated for these joint project approaches and a joint platform has been suggested to improve the implementation of the MRC Procedures and to move forwards to better development planning. 3.3 Session 3a: Results from implementation of the Basin Development Strategy Implementing the Strategy so far, through development in sectors such as irrigation and hydropower, and how the MRC Procedures, its Technical Guidelines, and guidance are being beneficially used? How regional perspectives are being integrated into national planning and vice versa? How key knowledge gaps on key issues such as sediments, fisheries and floodplain management are being addressed? Presentations 1 to 5 of Session 3a Presentation 1 Cambodia: Expanding irrigated agriculture in the floodplains, by H.E. Ponh Sachack, Director General of Technical Affairs, Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology, Cambodia. This presentation gave a background to irrigation in Cambodia and its future needs. Eighty per cent of the population live in rural areas and more than 70% depend on agriculture for their livelihood. The main irrigated agriculture in Cambodia is rice farming. It covers larger areas and demands more water compared to vegetable and animal production. Rice is still the main and strategic crop to contribute to economic development of the country. Thus expanded agriculture mainly focuses on rice production. The opportunities for expanding irrigated agriculture exist since there is a large cultivated area with only one season crop per year. Expansion of agriculture is a key part of the government s strategy to reduce poverty, to achieve food security and foster sustainable development. This has to go together with ensuring water security for irrigation. The presenter gave details of the various types of irrigation in Cambodia and of the number of schemes throughout the country small being less than 200 ha, medium 200 to 5,000 ha, and big being greater than 5,000ha. There are only 38 of these big schemes, out of a total of 2731 schemes. 35

56 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations Expansion of irrigated agriculture in Cambodia s floodplain is within the identified Development Opportunity Space in the current BDS and also is in Strategic Priority 2: Expand and Intensify Irrigated Agriculture for Food Security and Poverty Alleviation for basin development. The development of the BDS and its specification of the various scenarios for future water development have assisted Cambodia in better defining how it might go about expanding irrigation and where this might occur. Current water shortages are a major constraint to improving productivity. Efforts to develop and refurbish irrigation infrastructure have partly eased the situation in some areas, but only a portion of irrigation infrastructures have been rehabilitated. Significant expansion of irrigated agriculture will require much bigger efforts, with new irrigation schemes and expansion of existing ones. Also better water resources management at all levels, and better farmer education will be needed and the BDS needs to bring all these factors together to balance the benefits and impacts of expanded irrigation at all levels. Whilst a 50% increase in the area of irrigated rice is considered possible and realistic, any such agricultural expansion could cause considerable additional pressure on the remaining forest lands, as the population seeks new sources of building material, fuel and fodder. Also most farmers have extremely small land areas, and this limits their ability to make changes to farm/irrigation management; so designing and developing a new irrigation scheme and its new source of water, as supported by the BDS, is just one part capacity in irrigation operation and management is still limited so helping to educate and assist farmers to use this new technology, to change farming methods so as to make money, may be the more difficult part of the story. Presentation 2 Lao PDR: Realizing hydropower development opportunities in the Basin Development Strategy, by Dr. Daovong Phonekeo, Director General, Energy Policy and Planning, Ministry of Energy and Mines, Lao PDR. Dr. Daovong presented an overview of the need for hydropower development for Lao PDR, including: Lao PDR is rich in natural resources, especially water resources, which contributes 35% of the flow into the Lower Mekong River; 36

57 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations Despite economic growth over the last decade, Lao PDR is still the least developed country in the Lower Mekong Basin; Lao people living in poverty are 28%, which is the highest in the Lower Mekong Basin also it is much higher in rural areas; and National policy and priority to lift people out of poverty and graduate from Least Developed Country (LDC) status by He stressed what Lao PDR saw as the background for its desire and need for rapid hydropower expansion. Other countries in the LMB have had the opportunity to develop over the last 50 years. Instabilities in Lao PDR and Cambodia prevented developments during this time. Now with peace and stability, opportunities that were foregone in the past, now need to be realised. Hydropower development for Lao PDR has two primary purposes: 1. It promotes economic and social advancement by providing a reliable, clean and affordable domestic power, and is a key factor in the national plans to alleviate poverty and advance the economy of the nation. 2. It earns foreign exchange from exports (over 15% of all exports) and contributes to economic development and sub-regional energy demand. From the Lao perspective, we want to follow the MRC cooperative approach and in particular, follow the principles of the agreement such as cooperation in all fields of sustainable development, sovereign equality and territorial integrity (the right of riparian countries to sustainably develop its water resources), and reasonable and equitable development (already developed parts of the basin cannot prevent or foreclose the opportunities of the other less developed parts of the basin to develop). Lao PDR has ensured that expansion of hydropower is following the cooperative and consultative principles of the 1995 Mekong Agreement, and more specifically, the basin wide scenario assessments in the BDS, which includes the impact on priority issues such as capture fisheries, and the strategic priorities and actions related to improving sustainability of hydropower development. It is under Strategic Priority 3: Improve the Sustainable Hydropower Development. 37

58 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations Lao PDR has refocused its hydropower regulations and controls by the passing of a Policy on Sustainable Hydropower Development. The main points are: All large hydropower projects must produce a full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Environmental Management Plan (EMP); The right of all project-affected people will be recognized, and achieved through a Resettlement & Social Development Plan; A watershed adaptive management and participatory planning strategy will be developed to stabilize land use, and manage Protected Areas; Consultations will be conducted with all project-affected communities; Revenue sharing with the Environment Protection Fund (EPF); and Ensure financial and technical sustainability of the Project. The Mekong basin planning and consultation processes are important factors in how Lao PDR is developing its hydropower resources. It openly shares information about hydropower plans as part of MRC basin planning process scenario assessment, Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), and development of Basin Development Strategy it openly engages with our neighbours and other stakeholders as part of PNPCA process. We expect in return constructive comments and engagements and not unfair criticisms. During last four years, as a result of a prudent approach and a focus on achieving sustainable development, the implementation of projects is slower than planned. Only 8.8 per cent of the projects that were scheduled for commissioning before 2014 are currently in operation, the achievement rate is better in terms of capacity (50.7%), active storage (58.4%) and annual energy exports (72.2%). Sustainable and responsible development of hydropower can be a catalyst for economic development and can help bring millions of people out of poverty (as other developed countries have done). Presentation 3 Thailand: Implementing water resources management strategies in Mekong sub-basins, by Mr. Nipon Mulmuangsean, Member of 3T River Basin Committee, Thailand. Mr. Nipon presented the Transboundary Project between Thailand and Lao PDR on Wetland and Floodplain Management; Namkam Xe Bang Hieng sub-basins. Key issues include wetland management, fishery management, flood management and sustainable management. Project objective is to enhance transboundary cooperation between Lao PDR and Thailand by: Improving river basin management through strengthened capacity of the River Basin Committee (RBC) and working groups, Effectively using knowledge and IWRM tools, sharing information, application of the MRC Procedures, and Strengthening transboundary cooperation and project implementation and management. From these three outcomes, there are ten outputs expected from the project. The TNMC and LNMC facilitate coordination and implementation of the project. 38

59 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations Some progress made so far including the establishment of Namkam Working Group, identification of 15 Pilot Areas, and founding of 12 Sub-district Water Management Committees. As part of the work plan for 2014, several meetings and workshops are scheduled to complete establishment of the remaining three Sub-district Water Management Committee. Presentation 4 Integrating regional perspectives (the Basin Development Strategy) into national and sub-national planning, by Dr. Le Thi Kim Dzung, former Deputy Director, Development Strategy Institute, Viet Nam Ministry for Planning and Investment. Dr. Dzung presented on the integration of the BDS into the national planning systems. The overall objective is to suggest methods and procedures to mainstream BDS into national planning. Approaches and methodology for mainstreaming include identification of common issues between regional and national approaches such as principles, scale, methods, content and outputs. From this it is possible to determine consistencies and differences between the contents of the BDS and national plans, and any linkages and dependency between the two. The mainstreaming opportunities consist of assessment of planning overlaps or similarities, and also planning inconsistencies, any risks to national priorities and policies associated with BDS implementation are identified, opportunities and risks for mainstreaming BDS into MK delta planning and ways to Integrate BDS into national planning processes identified. Several recommendations have been suggested: Creating a National Action Plan for mainstreaming, Improving the BDS based on the guidelines provided by the national plans, and Supporting the countries to implement activities for improving BDS. Other recommendations for the MRC were: Adjusting/updating of Basin Development Strategy by integrating national plans into the BDS at each adjustment step, Developing resources to implement the Basin Action Plan (from 2016) focused on the investment promotion and resource allocation according to BDS, Providing of technical support to countries, and Developing a basin-wide planning database. Presentation 5 Implementing the Basin Development strategy in Cambodia, by Dr. Mak Solieng, Cambodia National Mekong Committee Secretariat. Dr. Mak presented the integration of regional perspectives into national and sub-national planning in Cambodia. The Royal Government of Cambodia will continue to fully cooperate with other Member Countries under the MRC Framework to ensure the sustainable development of the Mekong Basin. In particular, in regard to updating the IWRM-based Basin Development Strategy, MRC Strategic 39

60 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations Plan, and effectively implementing the activities under the MRC Framework and MRC decentralization plan as committed by the Heads of Government of the four countries. At the Cambodian national level, the implementation of the BDS is done through: Integration and application of the basin development planning process, tools and guidelines into the national and sub-national planning, including the national strategic development plan and water-sector development plans, and Implementation of the National Indicative Plan (NIP). Integrating the BDP/BDS into the National/Sub-national Planning process consists of analysing the development options in the BDS, plus the Cambodian NIP that comes out of the BDS, to determine commonality/consistency of projects/activities between the two plans or maybe complete inconsistencies of projects and priorities, which would mean major discussions between the MRCS and CNMC. Then a strategy would be developed for the common or overlapping projects so that implementation would comply with both the priorities of the national plans and the principles and guidance of the BDS. The actual integrating process that brings the NIP into the National/Sub-national rolling plan is based on ensuring that MRC s Strategic Priorities are integrated into the national development plan, but in a way that is in harmony with the national development strategy and priorities, and performance/output indicators. The results framework of the integrated plan will be integrated into the Monitoring and Evaluation Plan at national and sub-national level. In conclusion, although mechanism of a national BDP process has existed since BDP Phase 1, the integration process into the national planning has only just commenced with the NSDP The key factors to consider and implement are: Development of technical capacity on how to integrate the two planning systems and processes, Facilitation of the process to convince the relevant Line Agencies to accept the modification of the national and sub-national plans and planning techniques, and Application of the process in the real work to draw lessons and improvement. Comments/Questions/Suggestions from the first five presentations of Session 3a Will new water resources management frameworks in Lao PDR (e.g. the water law) affect hydropower development in the Lao PDR? The presenter said that any impact would be more directed at strengthened environmental assessment processes that are part of the new water management framework. The need to educate farmers in new irrigation management techniques is not an issue just facing Cambodia. All four countries are looking at ways of providing for greater farmer self-management involvement as well as educating in new technologies. A participant from Thailand said that it is promoting participatory community managed irrigation and emphasised Thailand s willingness to cooperate with Cambodia. It was agreed that this is an area where the four countries can work together to discuss what new approaches work well, and what don t in much the same way that a network of 40

61 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations RBOs has previously been suggested as a way of exchanging and developing best practices. Difficult hydrology (high variability floods and droughts) constrains present development and means that water resource management is a pre-requisite for development expansion and sustainable development. This emphasises the importance of the BDS and its strategic priorities for basin development and management. Countries tend to focus on comparative advantage (Lao for hydropower; Cambodia for irrigation) and this means that the four countries are at very different stages in relation to the development opportunity space, and this must lead to increasing competition for water between sectors. This emphasises the need for higher levels of cooperation and collaboration in the future. Upstream hydropower development within China provides opportunities (increased dry season flow) downstream and it becomes very important that protocols be established that give some certainty to how this enhanced dry season flow is to occur large and expensive developments downstream will be based on the existence of this flow so some degree of certainty is critical. Not clear to what extent national planning and management of water resources is influenced by the BDS. Linking the BDS into national planning systems is only just starting but there clearly is a need for greater harmonization if all countries are to achieve the benefits of joint collaboration. There are still knowledge gaps and loose ends relative to water resource development. These need to be tidied up so that the Development Opportunity Space (DOS) is better articulated than 4-5 years ago. The updated BDS is deliberately not changing current DOS until we get new information from the MRC Council Study, new scenario assessment and Mekong Delta Study Presentations 6 and 7 of Session 3a Presentation 6 Knowledge gaps on sediments and fisheries: science or advocacy? by Dr. Rinus Vis, Senior Expert & Manager of Sustainable Use of Water and Soil Team, Deltares. Dr. Rinus stressed the importance of removing as much doubt as possible from sediment and fisheries data as both of these issues are critically important in assessing just what level of impacts can be tolerated by new development options and projects. He emphasised the recognition of this in the current BDS, through Strategic Priority 4: Acquire Essential Knowledge to Address Uncertainty and Minimize Risk. Sediments and fisheries are transboundary issues: Sediment trapping by the ongoing and planned construction of large dams may cause a number of consequences, including increases in river bed and bank erosion, changes in the delta shaping processes, and reductions in fertilization of floodplains and coastal waters with nutrients, and High annual fish yields are already under pressure from over-fishing, habitat fragmentation, reduction of floodplains, and blockage of fish migration by dams, weirs and other infrastructure. A significant proportion of the system s river floodplain fisheries are at risk from ongoing and planned developments. 41

62 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations Trends in sediment load of a river depend on factors such as the natural erosion rate, accelerated erosion due to land use changes, soil conservation practices, sand mining activities and construction of dams. Some of these factors increase sediment loads, and others decrease them: Adamson (2009) came to the conclusion that the combined trapping efficiency of the 5 Mekong mainstream reservoirs proposed in Lao PDR could be as high as 80% 5 ; Combined with the assumed 90% trapping efficiency of the Yunnan cascade, this will greatly reduce the sediment loads in the river; Also dams in the Sekong, Sesan and Srepok (3S) Basin are expected to trap about 40% of the sediments 6 ; Other factors influencing future sediment loads are: catchment degradation, soil conservation and sand mining; With the uncertainty that comes with broad estimates, and with recent data indicating a sharp decrease in sediment loads of the Mekong River, can there be agreement as to the average annual amount of sediments reaching the Mekong Delta and leaving the catchment? If so, is this decrease caused by the construction of the cascade of hydropower dams in China, or are there other factors influencing the loads? What will be the impact of further hydropower development in the basin, including the construction of mainstream dams? What are the expected developments in sand mining and its impact on sediment loads? Regarding inland capture fisheries, available data for the period (national government and FAO information) indicates that there is an increase in annual catch in Cambodia, and relatively stable catches in Lao PDR, Thailand and Vietnam. However, inland capture fisheries are mostly traditional with a low proportion (<10%) of full-time fishers. Most fish are consumed by the households that catch or grow them and so are not recorded in official data. Estimates for Thailand are limited to large reservoirs and rivers; a recent national survey of fishing households showed that total production could be as high as 1.0 million tons/ year. And in Viet Nam, inland capture fisheries production estimates are for commercial catches only, these represent about 20% of total catches. So all of this data is very uncertain and not inclusive of all the capture fishing industry. This makes it very difficult for water planners and managers to make assessments of impacts of development on fishery numbers and more particularly, on the number of livelihoods affected by reductions in the fishery. As to the future outlook, in Cambodia the growth of the capture fisheries could continue in the short term, whereas production in Lao PDR, Thailand and Viet Nam is thought to stabilize. Aquaculture is likely to expand rapidly in Cambodia and Lao PDR, in response to growing domestic demand. With regard to aquaculture in Thailand, it is anticipated that production levels will steadily rise in the foreseeable future, in Viet Nam, the dramatic rate of increase in aquaculture production in recent years will begin to slow down 5 Adamson P. T An Exploratory Assessment of the Potential Rates of Reservoir Sedimentation in Five Mekong Mainstream Reservoirs proposed in Lao PDR. Mekong River Commission, Vientiane, Lao PDR. 6 Mekong River Commission Secretariat (MRCS) Impacts on River Morphology, Technical Note 4, Assessment of Basin-wide Development scenarios. Mekong River Commission, Vientiane, Lao PDR. 42

63 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations and further expansion will only take place in response to growing domestic and export market demand. But of course, if the impacts of mainstream dams are factored into these numbers and the linked to the number of people impacted, then present trends will change dramatically. A comment after the presentation was that neither sediment behaviour or fisheries health and distribution are easy issues to tie down as existing information is often sparse and unreliable, particularly in a large river basin like the Mekong. It becomes very important for the planners for scientists and sediment/fish experts, who often have widely divergent views and opinions, to reduce the scatter in the data within acceptable processes and limits, of course and provide the best available estimates with related probabilities for the planners to work with. The key for water resource planners is to be able to link natural resource data and information, and social/livelihood data, with behaviour responses to development stresses so that management options can be assessed linking data and information to management options is where the scientists and the water planners have to work closely together. Presentation 7 Making the basin-wide fisheries management and development strategy, by Dr. Sam Nuov, Chair of Fisheries Technical Advisory Body (TAB). Dr. Sam Nuov mentioned that work toward a fisheries strategy started way back in year 2000 with the setting up of a Technical Advisory Body on Fisheries Management (TAB) a joint institution. The TAB owns the process of formulating and implementing the fishery strategy. Why is such a strategy necessary? Because: (1) Capture fisheries are essential for economic, social and livelihood advancements of the LMB; (2) Survival and sustainable utilisation of the fisheries resources, their effective management and conservation will need a holistic approach to address the larger LMB ecosystem and challenges emerging from competing water resource use and development; and (3) Governments should, within their respective abilities and in international law and agreement, cooperate at national, regional and global levels through fisheries management organisations. Formulation process of the Basin-wide Fisheries Management and Development Strategy (BFMS) was based on a review of national strategies and policies related to fisheries and assessed against 12 factors. From this review draft strategic priorities relating to basin development and management were identified to be included into the BDS update. For basin development, these strategic priorities are: Regional joint cooperation and interdependent development increased, Essential knowledge to address development uncertainty and minimise risks acquired, Basin-wide optimal development for multiple use and mutual benefits in water and related sectors enhanced, and National water resources development improved. 43

64 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations For basin management, the strategic priorities include: Basin management procedures and processes strengthened, Protection and management of mutually agreed environmental assets strengthened, and Information management, communications and impact monitoring tools maintained and enhanced. Within these seven priority areas, there are 12 particular high priority areas or activities that will be the focus of the actual work to be done. Before these strategic priorities and the activities within them, are incorporated into the updated BDS, there still needs to be a round of national consultations with national stakeholders, followed by regional consultations and then MRC endorsement and approval. Comments on Presentations 6 and 7 of Session 3a Sediment and fisheries behaviour, and the related impacts of present and future developments Mr. Marc Goichot, Lead Sustainable Hydropower and River Basin Management, World Wildlife Fund (WWF), said: Impacts of dams are twofold: they regulate the flow and they fragment the river, hindering fish migration and sediment throughput. The BDS focuses too much on regulation and gives not enough attention to fragmentation. Sediment transport has already decreased in the last 15 years. It is not a problem of the future alone but something that is occurring now. Channels in the Mekong Delta lost a lot of sand and have locally incised by as much as 1.4 m, perhaps a joint problem from less sediment arriving from upstream and heavy sand extraction from the Mekong Delta itself. At the same time the coastline is locally retreating by up to 4 m per year. Experts contend that these changes are not related to changes in hydrology, hydraulics, or climate change but to lower amounts of sediment entering the river system. The Mekong is special; there is bedrock close to the surface from Sanakham to Vientiane and downstream of Pakse. Between Vientiane and Pakse, there will be serious loss of sand resulting in increased bank erosion. 44

65 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations The figures given for sand mining are conservative, probably even more sand is extracted than reported. One good thing about sand mining, you can stop it, dams you cannot. Mr. Alan Brooks, Director of World Fish Centre, expressed: We need a better understanding of sediment typology and the nutrient value of sediment for fish. Changing loads have an impact on fisheries. Accessing data through official statistics is still difficult; there is still a high variability in the results. Consensus is growing that fish consumption studies provide better results. Useful still to strengthen the existing monitoring capacity. The BFMS needs more detail (activities, outputs and outcomes), where do we want to be in 4 to 5 years. Public sharing should be encouraged. Do not spend much time and effort on yet another capture fisheries productivity study. Of more importance is to understand the vulnerability of the people depending on the resource, and to develop options at managing these impacts. Community fishery needs more investment, as does rice field fishery. In Cambodia rice field fisheries provides kg fish per year per household. This is very important. Replacing the loss of capture fishery with aquaculture is a contentious argument as capture fisheries is for free and aquaculture is business, requiring investment. Besides, intensive aquaculture can generate more environmental impacts. Mr. Sommano Phounsavath, Director, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Lao PDR, proposed: More study and scientific evidence on sediment are needed and the MRC could help in this. The MRC has conducted lots of studies in fisheries. Technical reports are available widely. The problem is how the results of these scientific studies can be used and applied for planning that is, converting this fishery data into meaningful information suitable for use by basin planners and managers. Too often scientific data is left in unprocessed form, which makes it very difficult for planners to properly consider. Mekong fisheries are considered very complex. There are a number of hotspots in the LMB, e.g. the Tonle Sap Lake, Siphan Don and Mekong Delta. Fisheries are resources, which are difficult to describe, due to a number of factors and sediment is one of them. The FAO reported recently that the fishery supply could not cope with current demand. Thus, aquaculture should be the focus as it has a great potential. Community based management should be further promoted. Question is how to align the BFMS with the BDS update as four national strategies still need to be aligned with BFMS. What about other strategies of other water related key sectors? A range of other issues were raised during Question and Answer Session of the two presentations on sediments and fisheries, including: In response to what is the impact of sand mining downstream of Pakse and are there any mitigation measures available, it was stated that 66 million tonnes of sediment reach Pakse every year, and downstream of Pakse between 35 and 55 million tonnes 45

66 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations are taken out (a difference of opinion between experts which shows the difficulty for planners in doing scenario assessments). This has impacts on the channel and bank stability and will lead to coastal retreat in the Mekong Delta. Mitigation is not easy, probably only regulation can limit the amount of sands taken from the river, but this requires detailed knowledge of a basin-wide sediment budget to underpin the regulation. Concerning any study of impact of aquaculture on capture fisheries, it was stated that for any kg of aquaculture produce, 1.3 kg of capture fish as feed is needed. This seems inconsistent and needs more work and perhaps the Mekong Delta Study could cover this aspect. Thailand has a lot of experience in aquaculture practice. Results from research on fisheries are not always reliable. As to the comment that fisheries are not one of the themes of MRC Council Study, it was stated that fishery is included in the Biological Resources Assessment theme of the MRC Council study. Sediment supports agriculture, provides raw materials for construction, it is a valuable resource and should be considered as such: not a problem, but a resource. The energy and the construction sectors are competing for this resource. 3.4 Session 3b: Assessment of scenarios and benefit sharing options To discuss the international and Mekong experience in benefit sharing. To discuss the limitations of the existing cumulative assessment of national plans and contribute to new development scenarios aimed at optimal development and regional benefit sharing in the Mekong basin. To seek answers to: What are the needs, opportunities and risks in the future in the context of providing basin-wide energy, food and flood security and resilience against climate change? How can the benefits from basin development be increased while minimizing adverse impacts? Presentations 1 and 2 of Session 3b Presentation 1 Benefit Sharing on International Rivers: Principles and Lessons from Experience, by Professor David Grey, Oxford University. Professor Grey emphasised the notion that water issues and sharing, and in particular cost and benefit sharing, can be a catalyst for cooperation rather than a major source of conflict. And the need for a cooperative approach becomes more important with the degree of hydrologic variability in a river basin countries with simple hydrology and high investments in water security tend to have high incomes but the more the variability, the more the need for urgent water conservation works to even out risks to society, and the more pressure on national governments to quickly solve their own problems or act nationally rather than more cost effective and fairer regional solutions. 46

67 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations A number of international examples were highlighted and it was stressed that benefit sharing should not just be confined to the river it should go well beyond to include such things as oil/gas pipelines, road links, railway links, inland water transport and port access. Need to think outside the square when considering how to share benefits and costs; benefits far away from the river and not directly related to water might be the winning factor in securing a country s endorsement for a project. And all of this must be within a climate of cooperation and this can only occur with openness and the sharing of good quality information, and a desire to find that solution which has the best mix of benefits for all parties. This means cooperating to go from possible singular or unilateral action, to coordination, to collaboration, to joint action. Maybe not all the way along these four steps but, for example, collaboration based on open sharing of good information will lead to a more acceptable project than if a country simply goes it alone via unilateral action. Professor Grey suggested that four types of benefits should be explored environmental, which usually means increasing benefits to the river, economic which means increasing benefits from the river, political meaning decreasing costs because of the river, and indirect economic meaning increasing benefits but away from, or beyond the river. And some messages from benefit sharing experiences around the world were: Rivers can be obstacles or entry points to cooperation depends how positive or negative the players are; Riparians most likely to cooperate if they perceive benefits outweigh costs; Benefit sharing must look beyond the immediate water benefits and costs locally affected people versus the profits to say, a power company, or wide ranging environmental and livelihood impacts versus economic returns to government and private investors; Increasing the scope, scale and range of benefit sharing options will create more interest and motivate greater cooperation; Emphasising fairness will motivate and sustain cooperation; Cooperative basin-wide planning can identify options that lead more toward optimal plans than if just considering national plans and projects; and Benefits linked to a physical location may be perceived as unfair as affected people or resources might be further away and not be as obvious as the physical location. Professor Grey suggested what all this might mean for the Mekong River by showing how benefits could accrue to all partners for projects dealing with the ecosystem, low flow management, downstream flooding, power supply and navigation. As a means of showing how 47

68 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations deals to promote benefit sharing might be identified, Professor Grey highlighted work or outputs from the BDP Working Group workshop in 2014, in Hanoi, in Viet Nam, which sought to identify issues or actions under four headings: The Mekong River we must avoid by 2030, The Mekong River we want by 2030, Joint opportunities we could develop by 2018, toward our preferred Mekong River 2030, and MRCS actions by 2016 to promote the 2018 deals. All four countries working together through these four areas or categories, means cooperation and collaboration, which should ultimately lead to joint projects based on a solid understanding and assessment of shared benefits and costs. Presentation 2 Benefit Sharing in Thailand, by Mr. Wiboon Pongtepupathum, Director, Project for Hydropower at Irrigation Dams, Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT). He provided information about the Power Development Fund in Thailand which is used to accumulate funds from power developers and operators for subsequent distribution to communities impacted by the power projects. The developers contribute 50,000 THB/MW/year during the construction period and then an ongoing fund contribution during the operation phase that varies depending on the energy source coal, lignite, hydropower, or fuel and diesel oil, or natural gas, biomass, wind turbine and solar. The beneficiaries from the fund are the communities within a 1, 3 or 5-km radius from the power plant (or further away if agreed by the fund committee) to cover issues/activities such as livelihood and quality of life, education, religion, culture, sports and music, or public health and environment activities, renewable energy development, and immediate aid to those affected by power plant development. It was emphasised that the fund was particularly suitable for thermal power plant operation as it was easier to identify impacted communities within the defined radius of influence. However, there should be no reason why hydropower plants could not be similarly considered even though those affected may well be many tens or hundreds of kilometres away. In such cases, the scope and outputs of the project EIA would apply in identifying affected communities rather than the radius of influence. Comments on Presentations 1 and 2 of Session 3b Benefit Sharing Benefit sharing must primarily be up to the four countries to promote; the MRCS is working hard, but it can only be a catalyst or coordinator maximising national interests and benefits are the driving issues that encourage a regional approach - countries cooperate when they see benefits. 48

69 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations Guidelines on cost and benefit sharing should be formulated so countries can better understand how all can benefit from a regional approach but the key factor is still that a national agenda is still a national agenda. Civil Society generally does not feel that they are properly included in the PNPCA processes of the MRC. However consultation within a country is a national issue and the culture and values of each country will determine just how consultation will occur. But MRC can assist by facilitating discussion on common grounds and processes for involving civil society. There is no blueprint for cost and benefit sharing. It is important to share the culture and spirit of cooperation in the Mekong Region and have this reflected in how sharing options are developed. These issues are difficult for any multi-country organisation and it is important to start now by working together rather than keep waiting for the perfect or optimal sharing approach. Cost and benefit sharing is a key part of the decision making process but in the end it is still only a part of a total package of information that the decision-makers must use to find the best balanced and most acceptable outcome for any project. Cost and benefit sharing comes with positive side effects such as stronger institutions, better governance and more understanding of regional issues, pressures and cultures. All Member Countries have experienced some level of regional/national/local cost and benefit sharing; whilst much more needs to be done to create common understandings and principles/processes, they already know well the weak and strong points of the cost and benefit sharing Presentations 3 and 4 of Session 3b Presentation 3 Cumulative Impact Assessment of the National Water Resources Development Plans, by Dr. Thanapon Piman, Water and Climate Change Specialist, MRCS. Dr. Piman provided background as to how the indicative national plans for water related strategies and development were combined into basin wide scenarios and assessed during the BDP2 as to likely environmental and social impacts, and economic benefits. Nine scenarios were assessed ranging from the present baseline situation up to two long term (year 2060) scenarios. There were 12 specific development objectives covering economic, environmental and social factors, and 42 assessment indicators, as well as equity evaluations all things considered, this approach was very comprehensive and gave a very good indication of the likely trade-offs and synergies within the national plans, at the cumulative scenario level. Scenarios should not be seen as a prediction of what will happen they more reflect what might happen and what might be the impacts and benefits. From these predictions, specific packages of projects, or individual projects, can be studied in more detail, progressively through the pre-feasibility, feasibility and project evaluation stages and so on. 49

70 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations Dr. Piman summarised, for the various scenarios, the likely economic benefits and the likely changes in flow and water level, river bed and bank erosion predictions, reduction in wetlands, impact on environment hotspots and on capture fisheries yields, and the possible impacts of climate change, particularly on the Mekong Delta. He also provided information on the likely numbers of vulnerable resource users impacted by the various scenarios those people being defined as those exposed to changes in river water resources, connected wetlands and capture fisheries. Viet Nam and Cambodia have the greatest number of people effected perhaps four times as many people impacted by the higher level scenarios compared with the definite future scenario. Seven areas of knowledge gaps were identified (water resources assessments are a continuing evolution as more knowledge is accumulated and this happens in all river basins) and progress has been made in improving the knowledge in some of these areas and more is underway with the MRC Council Study and the Mekong Delta Study. Whilst these results, and further ongoing improved knowledge, will be incorporated into the assessment work for the BDS update, the present review has already shown that the cumulative assessments made during for the initial BDS remain largely valid. That is, the improved knowledge does not appear to significantly change the overall assessments it is more a case of fine tuning and improving the confidence and trust in the results. Presentation 4 The Study on the Sustainable Development and Management of the Mekong River, by Dr. Henry Manguerra, Coordinator of the MRC Council Study, MRCS. He provided an overview of the MRC Council Study, what are its objectives and how it will reduce data, information and knowledge gaps. The priority areas of research and investigation are sediment and nutrient trapping, reduction of capture fisheries and social implications, social and livelihood impacts, and climate change risks and adaption needs, with related studies for ecosystem and floodplain management. Each of these priority areas has between one and three key activities that will address the main knowledge gaps. 50

71 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations The presenter showed how response curves could be established for factors such as extent of flooded forest, river pool depth, vegetation health, fish health and numbers and so on. These stress-response relationships become important parts of the indicators in the scenario assessment processes and a key part of the DRIFT DSS component of the overall MRC Decision Support Framework. It was emphasised that capacity building must go in parallel with the improved knowledge from these response curves. It simply will just be a scientific research study if the work does not bring the planners and basin managers along with improved understanding of the impact behaviour of key resource parameters and issues, and how these behaviours are transboundary in nature. Comments on Presentations 3 and 4 of Session 3b Cumulative Impacts of National plans, and the role of the MRC Council Study Countries are starting to move from a dominance of a national agenda to take greater account of a regional agenda ; this is apparent from the agreement to include basinwide and joint projects in the scenario assessments for the BDS update. The hydropower development scenario in the MRC Council Study should be based on the relevant development scenario of the BDP. There is an expressed wish for the MRC Council Study to hold public consultations to inform about progress and results, through the planned regional consultations or otherwise. Note that cumulative assessment in the BDP/BDS was not to elaborate the benefit sharing options, but to assess the broad impacts and benefits of the present and emerging national plans using the scenario assessment approach. It was argued that clear scientific-based results of changes in sediment behaviour were not in the presentations. But also argued that the sediment load was not mainly changed by hydrology and climate change, but by human activity. There was very limited information on sediment in the previous studies and hopefully the MRC Council Study and Mekong Delta Study could fill this gap Presentations 5 and 6 of Session 3b Presentation 5 Formulation of Long-term Exploratory Scenarios to Investigate how Regional Benefits can be Increased, by Mr. Malcolm Wallace, BDP Scenario Assessment Team, MRCS. Mr. Wallace recalled how cumulative national plans, as opposed to regional packages, were the basis of the scenario assessments in the initial BDS and how this approach gave what could be called mixed results. For example, there were clearly substantial economic benefits but also significant adverse transboundary environmental and social impacts, and the distribution of these benefits and costs between the four countries were seen by some communities, stakeholders and country agencies as not being reasonable and equitable. 51

72 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations These perceived shortcomings of the initial BDS, and the somewhat unilateral nature of the national development plans (very little regional approach seeking to share benefits and costs across borders) are being addressed in the updated BDS by first identifying the likely main challenges for basin development and management well into the future this was not done to any real degree in the first BDS and then, as identified in the draft BDS update under the area of basin-wide optimal development, to undertake assessment of alternative medium term development plans based on exploratory long term scenarios. The long term scenarios must be exploratory a broad picture of what could occur well into the future but they are an important tool to help river basin planners and managers identify where opportunities lie and where future collaborative effort between countries can help create mutual benefits whilst reducing costs. Such long term scenarios also enable a pro-active approach to be adopted in shaping the future development of the basin that will be included in the BDS update. Such collaborative work will also provide some early lead time for the setting of national medium term plans, in a way that will better include regional projects. Mr. Wallace identified four areas of trade-offs that have already been specified as key areas for study and assessment. They are: Balancing economic benefits with social and environmental protection, Balancing the increase of reservoir and natural storage, Balancing mainstream and tributary hydropower development, and Balancing development of the floodplains with preservation of flood storage and related environmental protection. In effect, these four areas will influence how scenarios are evaluated and will help show if the benefits and impacts are balanced in terms of where trade-offs occur and who might be affected. All of this must be done through a strong participatory process using in the first instance, the existing Regional Technical Working Group; the next steps will be asking this Group to assist with formulating the range of long term scenarios that will comprehensively examine the trade-offs identified above. Presentation 6 Approach to Regional Benefit Sharing in the Mekong Region, by Mr. Ton Lennaerts, International Technical Advisor, MRCS. Mr. Lennaerts gave a background summary of how the 1995 Mekong Agreement supports optimisation of multiple use and mutual benefits of all riparian countries, and joint and/or basin wide development through formulation of a basin development plan, as specified in Articles 1 and 2 of the Agreement, and how these obligations are mandated by various procedures approved by the MRC Council. The basin planning process has used the concept of a Development Opportunity Space (DOS) as an indication of how, what type, where and in what packages basin development could be optimised. The space is bounded or constrained, by thresholds that come from both the MRC Procedures and from the acceptable values (or acceptable impact levels) of social, environmental and equity indicators. That is, if the acceptable levels of the various indicators 52

73 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations heavily rely on present levels of water flows and volumes, then there may not be much opportunity for future development (without causing significant impacts on these indicators). On the other hand, if the indicators are such that there are large volumes of water above these indicator levels, then there will be many opportunities for development. The DOS should be considered as a cooperation or negotiation space for the countries to consider a wide range of packages of projects, many of which could be of a joint development nature, or ones that will have multi-country benefits that create sharing deals that go beyond individual water projects, or beyond the water sector. For example, there will be national projects of basin-wide significance that create development opportunities elsewhere in the basin, as well as joint projects that address issues and opportunities that one country alone could possibly not be able to implement effectively. If a package of development falls within the DOS that is, its cumulative impacts lie beyond and outside the constraining or threshold indicators then these projects have jumped the first hurdle in the assessment process. But this does not, in any way, indicate endorsement all projects must still go through the normal pre-feasibility, feasibility and negotiation processes and comply with the various, agreed MRC procedures. By the four countries jointly looking at long term scenarios, and then the medium term (2030) scenarios that flow from these, a common understanding should be developed as to what transboundary impacts and risks might be considered acceptable. As well, a range of basinwide and joint projects that show promise should be agreed upon and if these happen to fall within the scope of the DOS, it will be possible to move toward optimal basin development which will lead to the best possible balance between maximised shared benefits and lowest possible costs and impacts. For example, if the results from the various medium term year 2030 scenarios (as said, these will flow from the more indicative long term year 2060 scenarios) show increases in national benefits and decreases in transboundary impacts, there will be powerful incentives for countries to include these joint projects in national plans. In this way, optimising regional benefits from joint projects and activities will become a routine part of the long to medium term scenarios. Comments on Presentations 5 and 6 of Session 3b Formulation of Long-term Exploratory Scenarios, and Approach to Regional Benefit Sharing Cumulative assessment of national plans allowed us to estimate broad benefits and costs to each country in a very participatory manner but merely assessing impacts of national plans is not benefit sharing. We need to also consider localised impacts, not only costs and benefits at national level. National plans do not comprehensively address the long term needs, nor are they perceived as reasonable and equitable at regional scale. We need to communicate clearly that scenarios are not necessarily a reality but possible options, possible pictures of the future. Benefit sharing is already happening: e.g. internationally with Lao and Thai energy development, and with the Power Development Fund in Thailand. 53

74 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations We need to better understand these initiatives and extend lessons to elsewhere in the basin. 3.5 Session 3c: Updating of the Basin Development Strategy for The emerging long-term strategic priorities for basin development and management together with the near-term strategic actions ( ): Are they relevant, realistic and appropriate? Will they assist countries on the path to optimal development? Will they promote increased cooperation and regional integration? Are there critical gaps in the strategic priorities and actions and should changes be made? What should be the role of the MRC, national agencies and broader stakeholders (other regional initiatives, private sectors, and civil society) in the implementation of these priorities? Presentations 1, 2 and 3 of Session 3c Presentation 1 GMS Regional Investment Framework and links to the updated Basin Development Strategy, by Mr. Raza Farrukh, Asian Development Bank Headquarters. Mr. Raza Farrukh presented the GMS Regional Investment Framework which operationalizes the new GMS Strategic Framework ( ) and translates strategic directions into a pipeline of Investment and Technical Assistant (TA) projects across the GMS Member Countries. It consists of high priority sub-regional projects with the largest share of technical assistance going to the environmental sector. The criteria for prioritizing projects are: Sub-regional development benefits and impacts strong sub-regional rationale and benefits, including improved connectivity and competitiveness, and/or strengthened approaches to health, education and environmental issues; Economic and social viability the project is likely to be economically viable and, where relevant, financially viable and likely to produce social benefits; Availability of financing financing sources identified, or has good potential for funding by ADB, development partners and/or the private sector; Status of preparation technical, social and environmental impact assessments have been initiated or completed; and National priorities project aligned with national/economic development plans/strategies. 54

75 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations Potential areas for involvement with the MRC Programmes and projects are: Finance/co-finance investment and technical assistance projects; Support policy dialogue, capacity building and knowledge sharing; Assist in promoting private sector participation, where applicable; and Promote coordination among Development Partners as well as with GMS Sector Forums, Working Groups and Task Forces. 55

76 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations Presentation 2 Strengthening ASEAN-MRC Cooperation, by Mrs. Wan Joon Lian, Assistant Director of IAI&NDG Division, ASEAN Economic Community Department, ASEAN Secretariat. The ASEAN representative outlined the sub-regional cooperation within the organisation s various programmes with particular reference to the Initiative for ASEAN Integration (IAI), which has the main goals of promoting effective cooperation and mutual assistance to narrow the development gap among ASEAN Member States (AMS) and between ASEAN and the rest of the world. In regard to the ASEAN and MRC working together, it would be effective if the MRC could engage with ASEAN sectoral working groups such as the Water Working Group, Aquaculture, Transport etc. The presenter outlined a range of areas, where the MRC could consider making operational changes and introducing new approaches, based on ASEAN experience elsewhere in the region. This would best be facilitated by joint ASEAN-MRC discussions. Presentation 3 The IFC, the Private Sector and the updated Basin Development Strategy, by Mrs. Kate Lazarus, Senior Operations Officer, Environment, Social and Governance Department, International Finance Corporation. The International Finance Corporation (IFC) is a member of the World Bank Group dealing with engaging the private sector in infrastructure projects. The IFC has no formal engagement with the MRC but was invited to attend the MRC international conference in 2014 at which it presented the sustainable hydropower program in the Mekong region, and IFC s Sustainability Framework with its three components: sustainability policy, access to information and policy, and environmental and social review procedures. Mrs. Lazarus gave an overview of the role of the private sector in basin development and emphasised how important the private sector is becoming it is the engine of competitive solutions to sustainability and can help finance and address sustainability challenges. Experience has shown that without private sector engagement at all stages of policy and strategy development, and in formulating financing rules, guidelines and procedures, it is unlikely that projects will be realised private developers have a basic interest and role to play in how new policies evolve as they are the ones that have to live within the policy. The private sector now has a good understanding on how sustainability in corporate strategies and operational performance, adds value to its overall organisation s reputation and performance. Lowering costs by improving operational efficiency, increasing revenue and growth opportunities through environmentally and socially sound products and services, and improving access to capital funds through high level, or better, corporate governance these three factors are central to sustainable operations ; the key is helping such organisations to achieve this philosophy and performance. 56

77 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations For the BDS and its updated version, the private sector needs to be meaningfully engaged by consulting with them on the strategy, providing genuine opportunity to engage, and providing an opportunity to identify strategic financing to meet the needs of the strategy. A key point of contact could be the Hydropower Developers Working Group. This group was launched in December 2013 and has convened quarterly ever since. Hundred companies have already joined the group. The aims of the working group are: To improve environmental and social risk management among hydropower companies, To provide a platform for hydropower developers to comment on policies, share information and improve management, and To provide an opportunity to raise sector wide issues to Lao PDR through the annual Lao Business Forum. Some suggestions for the MRC are: The MRC could consider joining the Working Group, or at least have a regular dialogue with the group; To include the private sector more substantially in the BDS; To identify how the stakeholders can contribute more meaningfully to the implementation of the BDS; 57

78 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations The need to consult with other stakeholders on the strategy; and Provide opportunity to identify strategic financing to meet the needs of the strategy. Comments on Presentations 1, 2 and 3 of Session 3c Perspectives of ADB, ASEAN and IFC The Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) provided the following comments: For the collaboration between the ADB and MRC, is there a need to enhance energy governance? The MRC should be more proactive in engaging with the GMS in MRC- ADB dialogue on energy and water related issues through the GMS Energy committee. What is the task of the ASEAN Water Working Group? Does it deal with transboundary issues? The MRC-ASEAN cooperation should explore the possibility of synergising the ASEAN Green Climate Fund, and the MRC Climate Change Fund. The SEI extends an invitation to the ADB, ASEAN and MRC to join the Mekong Sustainable Network, which is a network or researchers working on Mekong issues Presentations 4 and 5 of Session 3c the Updated Basin Development Strategy Presentation 4 The Updated BDS Priorities, Implementation and Monitoring, by Dr. Anoulak Kittikhoun, Coordinator of the BDP Programme. Dr. Kittikhoun provided further information on the background and process for updating the BDS. This overview complements the earlier presentations in the initial plenary Session 2; Getting Engaged, and in the subsequent Sessions 3a and 3b. The updated BDS will continue the approach from the initial BDS in that it will have two basic components the Development Opportunity Space and Strategic Priorities for Basin Development and Management. Whilst the first BDS focused on the analysis and assessment of packages of projects from national plans (that is, joint development was not really dealt with), the updated strategy will focus more on what might be the scenarios that represent the medium to long term, and that focus more on joint projects with enhanced shared benefits and reduced costs. It is expected that these medium term scenarios will highlight the advantages of joint or multi-country development and this could result in countries adjusting national plans to include such joint development projects. The identification of the long term needs of the basin have come from an analysis of regional and national plans and predictions, and national strategies for economic development and poverty alleviation. From this, the five long term strategic needs are: Food and livelihood security, Resilience against floods and droughts, Protection of key environmental assets, Energy security, and 58

79 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations Improved navigation. From these needs, both Opportunities and Challenges have been identified: For Opportunities Investment in water related sectors emphasising multiple use and mutual benefits, Strengthened approach to environmental and disaster management, and Strengthened cooperation between the MRC, and regional and international partners. For Challenges Balancing trade-offs in water and related sector development, Uncertainties associated with climate change, Weakness in implementation of cooperation procedures and mechanisms, Limitations in human and institutional capacity, Weakness of coordination across agencies at the national and sub-national levels, and Weakness in knowledge management and communication. From these needs, seven Strategic Priorities for Basin Development and Management have been identified: For Basin Development Regional joint cooperation and interdependent development increased, Essential knowledge to address development uncertainty and minimise risks acquired, Basin-wide optimal development for multiple use and mutual benefits in water and related sectors enhanced, and National water resources development improved. For Basin Management Basin management procedures and processes strengthened, Protection and management of mutually agreed environmental assets strengthened, and Information management, communications and impact monitoring tools maintained and enhanced. At the regional level, each of these seven areas within basin development and management has five or so priority actions that will be worked on by the MRC over the next 5 years. There will also be a range of activities within each NIP for each of the strategic priority areas and collectively, how the MRC achieves the required outputs, together with each of the four Member Countries, will determine how successful the Mekong Agreement partners are in achieving the goals for the next 5 years. 59

80 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations A key point to consider will be the need to have engagement of the stakeholders in a more systematic manner than has occurred previously. A regional stakeholder platform is being proposed but this will need to look closely at the best way to interact with the wide variety of stakeholders within the basin and how to best manage the very wide cross-section of views from these groups. As occurs in most developing river basins, the range of views and opinions are as broad as the spectrum varying from black to white - and having one peak level stakeholder group may not necessarily provide the most effective, or satisfying, platform for consultation. Presentation 5 Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E), by Dr. Vitoon Viriyasakultorn, MRCS. The monitoring of progress of the BDS is just one part of a three part M&E process that assesses how well the MRC, and the four Member Countries, are achieving the MRC goals and objectives. The other two key areas are the MRC Strategic Plan, and the MRC Core Function/Decentralisation programme. A Log Frame approach is used to specify what is expected from each activity and how progress should be measured. The regular State of the Basin reports are a main tool to measure overall impact. Dr. Viriyasakultorn showed how the three activities BDS, MRC Strategic Plan, and the Core Function/Decentralisation plan are all interconnected. He showed how the seven strategic priorities for basin development and 60

81 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations management in the updated BDS are directly linked to the MRC Strategic Plan; activities in that plan are specifically framed to answer the question What changes will MRC make happen over the next 5 years to address the basin priorities, needs and opportunities? What has to be in place to achieve these desired outcomes?. The Log Frame approach will measure progress of goals, outcomes, outputs and activities against specified indicators. This will feed into performance reports Six Monthly Output Reports, Annual Outcome Reports, and the State of the Basin. Comments arising from Presentations 4 and 5 of Session 3c the Updated BDS Social and good governance are not well covered in the updated BDS. Both are important factors in successful and sustainable water-related development. More sign of political commitment needed for basin-wide cooperation and basin sustainability. Some participants (not all) said that despite big improvements in the basin planning processes over the last ten years, key problems and weaknesses still existed in the first BDS process, including: Low public participation despite what others might say, External risks were downplayed, and Process used a Panel of Experts whilst providing good advice, this is not a substitute for obtaining the broad views of stakeholder groups. Some (not all) argued that despite governance being more focused, and the IWRM process more integrated, the present update still has weaknesses such as: The role of national agencies is still unclear or missing, The involvement of local communities is still low, 61

82 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations Unclear linkages between the BDS and MRC Strategic Plan, Marginalised people not given enough attention, and The balance between development and environmental protection still unclear. The BDS should clearly state where we are at and where we are not, and where we want to go. Some repetition of the previous BDP/BDS; it needs to be further expanded. The concept of optimal development needs to be clearly defined and evaluated. 3.6 Closing Session Dr. Pech Sokhem, Forum Facilitator, expressed appreciation on behalf of the participants to all those involved in organising and running the Forum. In particular, he thanked the Royal Government of Cambodia and the Members of Cambodian National Mekong Committee and MRC for hosting the Forum and arranging the field trips for the next day. Mr. Hans Guttman, CEO of the MRCS, also expressed his thanks to all participants for the valuable inputs made to the Forum, and the way that all discussions had been conducted in such a constructive manner. He assured the participants that the MRC, as an inter-government agency, was keen to reach out to the wider stakeholder community and saw the need to strengthen and re-invigorate its consultation and participation processes. H.E. Mr. Te Navuth, Secretary General of Cambodia National Mekong Committee Secretariat, appreciated the value of the two days of discussions, which had provided the opportunity for a broad spectrum of stakeholders to discuss basin planning and to contribute to the understanding of what is meant by optimal development. He assured the participants that the comments and key messages would be listened to and where possible, would be included within the structure and priorities of the updated Basin Development Strategy. The next steps would be to re-adjust the structure and content of the current draft of updated BDS, to then have discussions and negotiations between the four Member Countries, and then place the final draft of the updated Basin Development Strategy before the MRC Council for approval. On behalf of the MRC, H.E. Mr. Te Navuth thanked the presenters, facilitators, panellists, rapporteurs, organising committees and members of the CNMC and MRC Secretariat for making the Forum a success, and declared the Forum closed. 62

83 Chapter 3 Review of the Forum Presentations 63

84 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues 64

85 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues 4 SYNTHESIS OF DIALOGUES FOCUSING THE DISCUSSIONS The 4 th Regional Stakeholder Forum gave a priority to interactive sessions and much opportunity for all participants to present views, ask questions and make commentary. Some issues received more attention than others. The main issues and comments, but certainly not all, are summarised below. 4.1 The MRC Cooperation Role Effective or Not? Much more is now being achieved in how the four Member Countries and MRCS collectively go about joint water management and policy/procedure development, and also in reducing transboundary risks related to flooding, navigation, water quality, etc. There is now a strong information bank that is readily available for all basin stakeholders and communities to access but, like all basin organisations even those with a much longer history than the MRC we still have knowledge gaps and some are in essential high priority areas. We need to close these knowledge gaps and the comments about data and information issues, and about natural resource stress-related behaviours, and the needs of the marginalised or vulnerable people, are clear signs of improved cooperation and consultation between MRC and the scientific and stakeholder communities. This advice is taken seriously and when linked to the outputs from the MRC Council Study and the Mekong Delta Study, will provide the guidance for prioritising the data improvement activities within the updated BDS. And it is accepted that the MRC needs to strengthen cooperation with its range of development partners, as with the ASEAN, ADB and GMS. Also with civil society ; some of these groups have said that they generally do not feel that they are properly included in the formal consultation procedures of the MRC. This will be improved and will be done by analysing, and consulting on, our existing arrangements to see how all of this liaison and cooperation can be made more effective. However it must be realised and accepted that consultation within a country is a national issue and the culture and values of each country will determine just how consultation will occur. But the MRC can assist by facilitating discussion on common grounds and processes for involving civil society. And a question sometimes asked should China be a full member of the MRC. The delegation from China stressed that there is already intensive communication with the MRC and the four Member Countries and technical and water management information is continually being exchanged and this is being strengthened all the time. The issues and roles from upstream and downstream in the Mekong River are not equal and sharing information is the essential task right now to ensure there are no misunderstandings on the upper river developments. This is occurring in an open and cooperative manner. And central to the MRC s in-house cooperation must be an emphasis on supporting the Member Countries in the transition of the MRC to become financially independent of donor support. A new decentralised model for cooperative basin management has been endorsed by the MRC Council and this will need a concentrated effort to make all this happen new water 65

86 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues management and planning arrangements plus a new way of funding the Mekong Basin activities. And within this decentralised form of basin management, there will be varying priorities from country to country as to what type of developments are highest priorities, and with this comes the need for understandings of local, national and transboundary impacts. Hydropower may be high priority for one, irrigation development and food security for another, flood protection and management for another, climate change and impacts on coastal processes for another. All this means a much more open and detailed form of cooperation than in the past, an approach that respects each other s views and development aspirations, and one where everyone the four countries and the basin stakeholders work together to find ways of meeting national and basin-wide goals in a way that attempts to best meet the stakeholders issues and concerns. So in many respects, the MRC initiative is now entering a far wider and more complex form of cooperation and consultation than in the past, and formulating approaches that best achieve all of this at international, riparian countries, Development Partners, basin communities levels must be a priority for the updated BDS. 4.2 Optimal Development What Does It Mean? It is in the title of this 4 th Regional Stakeholder Forum but it can have a wide interpretation. Optimal Development is part of Articles 1 and 2 of the 1995 Mekong Agreement, so it is proper for it to be a goal for Mekong development. Optimal means the most desirable or favourable, best possible, most advantageous so in a development sense, it should be understood as the best direction for development. That is, it is not a silver bullet solution, where all assessments and analyses point to one specific, clear and peak solution. An optimal solution will usually be the result of balancing out detailed analyses using resource optimisation tools, high level government discussions about political issues and policies, assessments as to how a development scenario meets regional and national policies and objectives, how is benefit sharing occurring, what will be the acceptable impacts and so on. In the Mekong situation, all of these factors will be considered at the four national levels as well as at the regional level so there will always be much debate as to what is the best approach toward optimal development and where the optimal solution to a development package will sit. It is all about give and take. It is the development of the full potential of sustainable benefits. 66

87 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues 4.3 Supporting Analytical Tools Are They Adequate? Underpinning all these discussions on priority development options and projects, and what might be optimum or not, are technical assessments hydrologic, economic, social, environmental that help to empower decision makers in their discussions and debates. Natural resource stress behaviour relationships, baseline indicators, modelling of all types, resource allocation techniques and so on are all essential aspects and tools of basin organisation but there is always the question do we have enough good quality information and analytical tools to guide good decision making? The MRC has a good range of information and analytical tools, but not as much as we would like, but no basin organisation ever has all the information it needs as the basin itself keeps changing through natural circumstances as well as human occupation and related development. The MRC will continue to give priority in the updated BDS to improving analytical tools and, as mentioned before, closing essential knowledge gaps. As well, it will be important to add to the stock of basin information from the practical knowledge of local and sub-basin communities. Experience from other older and more mature basin organisations has shown that involving local/sub-basin communities in the data/information gathering will lead to better and more informed decisions. Such local level contact and participation are for the national agencies to arrange and MRC will give priority to developing common systems and approaches where this is appropriate to do so. 67

88 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues Decision making on basin-wide issues and outcomes will always be the result of negotiation, and a mix of give and take. The better the information, tools and assessments that can be provided to decision makers, and the more involved local communities are in defining issues and offering up solutions, the more balanced, better and acceptable will be the outcomes. 4.4 Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) Still a Mystery? If during the process of formulation and implementation of the first BDS, there was confusion as to what is the meaning of Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) and Basin Sustainability, then this must be addressed within the updated BDS process. After-all IWRM is the very basis upon which the strategy is formulated and structured and water planners and managers must be careful not to leave behind the wider basin community as they develop planning options that seek sustainable development. To simplify this even further, IWRM can be seen as a concept or an approach that brings all the stakeholder groups within a basin together with the basin planners and managers to discuss and debate all the information (economic, social and environmental) that underpins the planning, to review all the modelling and assessments that lead to development and protection options and to offer suggestions and alternatives, to be part of the benefit and 68

89 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues impact sharing studies, to identify gaps, problems and contentious issues, and to contribute to the balancing act that seeks to find the most acceptable package of developments. Not all groups will necessarily be part of all processes, and not at all levels give stakeholder and community groups the level of input that they are comfortable with but each must be given genuine opportunities to participate. Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) is a process that promotes the coordinated development and management of water, land and related resources, in order to maximise economic and social welfare in a balanced way without compromising the sustainability of the ecosystems. IWRM is not an end in itself but a means of achieving three key strategic objectives of Efficiency (attempt to maximise the economic and social welfare derived not only from the water resources base, but also from investments in water service provision); Equity (in the allocation of scarce water resources and services across different economic and social groups) and Sustainability (as the water resources base and associated ecosystems are finite) 7. It is all about open and transparent dialogue, discussion and decision making not everyone will agree on outcomes and solutions but if all the stakeholder groups have had honest opportunities to understand the underpinning data and information, and modelling assessments, and then contribute views and concerns right throughout the planning process 7 Global Water Partnership (GWP) Integrated Water Resources Management. Global Water Partnership, Stockholm, Sweden. 69

90 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues as is appropriate for a particular type of stakeholder group - then it can be said that integrated water resources management is being followed. Again, IWRM is not an end in itself. The MRC is committed to this process, and the updated BDS and its implementation will do everything possible to embrace all aspects of IWRM through strong stakeholder participation. Consultation where the concepts, results and outcomes are unclear and not well understood is not consultation at all. 4.5 The First Basin Development Strategy Good Progress or still a Question Mark? There is much discussion as to what progress means when assessing the first BDS is it related to how much, and what type of development has actually been implemented over the last four years (afterall, it is a development strategy ) or should it more relate to how many of the priority areas of the BDS have been worked on, or completed over the last four years. It must be the latter progress on the BDS priority areas as how this has occurred, together with new information from the last four years, will determine just how the updated BDS is structured. The first BDS was structured around a Development Opportunity Space a space where countries can collaborate and negotiate on a range of possible and acceptable projects and 15 strategic basin management and development priorities that defined the key areas that needed to be worked on, so that any development decisions would be based on strength and certainty of both benefits and impacts. These 15 strategic basin management and development priorities are being implemented through a Basin Action Plan that has two parts; a Regional Action Plan, implemented through MRC programmes; 70% of these activities are being implemented, and, National Indicative Plans, implemented by relevant Line Agencies; 40% of these are being implemented. Good progress but not complete has been made in key areas such as strengthened cooperation with China, reaching agreement on protecting the baseline for dry season flows, the improved sustainability of hydropower development (identifying ecologically sensitive sub-basins, evaluating benefit sharing options for tributary hydropower, design guidance for mainstream dams, etc.), adapting to climate change, establishing basin objectives 70

91 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues and strategies for water related sectors, developing economic, environmental and social indicators for basin management objectives. On the development side, progress has been limited. Irrigation opportunities that could use the increased dry season flows from the upstream dams in China particularly in Northeast Thailand and Cambodia have not progressed to a great extent. But for tributary hydropower, some 20 tributary projects moved from the planning to the implementation stage. On the mainstream, one dam has moved to implementation whilst a second is in the consultation phase. And a range of flood protection and river training works are being constructed. Sand mining has accelerated. On the positive side, to summarise: The BDS moved MRC cooperation from primarily knowledge creation and sharing, to cooperation on real basin development and basin management issues. It balanced development and protection by providing development opportunities while setting priorities to avoid and manage risks. It started the move to harmonising regional and national level planning. It commenced work aimed at reducing key knowledge gaps, particularly in sediment and nutrient trapping, in implications of reductions in capture fisheries, social and livelihood impacts of various developments, and climate change risks and adaption needs. On the negative side, The initial BDS did not comprehensively address future needs, or respond adequately to the water-food-energy-flood nexus but looking back now, perhaps it was not appropriate to go this far in a first edition of a BDS. It did not strategically link to a regional, integrated development agenda that included joint actions and basin wide projects but again, a first edition of the BDS had to focus on what was agreed between the four riparian countries the art of the possible and not reach out too far, and away from existing national planning processes and approved plans. It did not elaborate clearly on the Development Opportunity (and which is not) which could have facilitated the PNPCA process better (the next update of the BDS in 2019 should clearly include a Basin Development Plan). Overall, good progress but with still a lot to do to reduce key knowledge gaps, to better understand social issues and impacts on marginalised people, to better define environmental baseline indicators and integrate all of this improved information and knowledge into the scenario assessments. 71

92 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues 4.6 Droughts, Floods, Groundwater and Poverty and Gender All Need Attention The consideration of drought management has been inadequate so far. This is an issue of particular importance to Thailand. There is an expectation that the MRCS will provide regional or comparative data and information on water-related drought issues to complement the body of national data but this has not occurred. This needs to be part of the updated BDS. Whilst it is agreed that more flood protection studies and work is needed in the Mekong Delta, more studies are needed upstream as well, as the prediction of floods is still unreliable and the damages quite high. Groundwater does not seem to have been mentioned to any degree. It might be much lower priority than surface water conservation but it can be important at the local area level and particularly for short term supplies during droughts. Further discussions are needed with the riparian countries to assess how important are groundwater issues and if so, how could they be studied and funded. Poverty and gender are not adequately reflected in the draft updated BDS; yet both are central to what must be achieved from sustainable development of the basin. Whilst long-term changes in the rural socio-economy may reduce the numbers of vulnerable resource users in the future, there is a clear need for the MRC, and the four Member Countries, in the short to medium term, to promote food security and pro-poor development in its sector strategies for water resources development. Water management is not gender specific, and actionable guidelines could be developed for the MRC and its Member Countries to reduce existing inequalities and promote gender-responsive and effective water governance systems, policies and strategies. 72

93 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues 4.7 Uncertainty with Fishery Issues There seems to be a lot of uncertainty in the data surrounding fisheries issues, which makes it difficult to formulate management options for considering fisheries impacts within the various development scenarios. For example, figures given on aquaculture production in Viet Nam are higher than the capture fisheries production. Some people (though also contested by others) say this is impossible since the production of every kg of aquaculture fish, 1.3 kg of capture fish as feed is needed to guarantee good quality. It is therefore recommended that: 1. We need a better understanding of sediment typology and the nutrient value of sediment for fish. Changing loads have an impact on fisheries. 2. The Basin-wide Fisheries Management and Development Strategy (BFMS) needs more detail (Activities, Outputs, and Outcomes), where do we want to be in the next five years. 3. Need to better understand the vulnerability of the people depending on capture fishery, and to look at possible ways of adjusting livelihoods. Some argue that replacing the loss of capture fishery with aquaculture is not adequate as capture fisheries is for free and aquaculture is business requiring investment. Others argue that local communities relying on capture fishery will, sooner or later, broaden their economic ambitions and seek to move up and away from a capture fishery lifestyle. Already aquaculture is larger in three countries of the Mekong River than capture fisheries. Irrespective of these diverging views it seems clear that community fishery needs more investigation and possible investment as a means of offsetting possible development impacts. As does rice field fishery which can produce large amounts. 73

94 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues Is it possible and feasible to establish aquaculture/community fisheries in those areas such as along/within the Tonle Sap Lake to offset the anticipated capture fishery losses caused by development? How could benefit sharing be part of this concept? Can the Development Partners and Banks assist with such analyses and studies? This would seem to be a priority area of study. 4.8 Farmer Education Keeping Pace with Technology Improvements Lifting farmers skills in irrigation technology and water management issues must be addressed if successful major investment is to occur in new irrigation schemes. All four countries are looking at ways of providing for greater farmer self-management involvement as well as educating in new technologies. This is an area where the four countries can work together to discuss what new approaches work well, and what don t in much the same way that a network of RBOs has previously been suggested as a way of exchanging and developing best practices. 4.9 A Network of River Basin Organisations Are We There Yet? Such an RBO network was given high priority at the 3 rd Regional Stakeholder Forum but has much progressed over the last four years? Each country is at quite different stages of river 74

95 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues basin/sub-basin organisation development; Thailand has the most comprehensive approach and this has been operational for more than five years. Involving the stakeholders and local communities within a sub-basin, in identifying problems and finding possible solutions has been proved to be a success and a key part of the consultation process in many developed river basins around the world. And in most of these cases, there is a coordinating/cooperating mechanism or approach that allows these specific sub-basin groups to interact with each other; to share what is working and what doesn t and to look at different ways of implementing a participative approach. It has been proved that better water resources or river basin management comes from strong local community/stakeholder involvement. This approach must be strengthened as the local groups become more informed and skilled. Establishing a mechanism where they can talk to each other should be a continuing priority in the updated BDS Increased Dry Season Flow the Engine That Will Power Expanded Irrigation Increased dry season flows from the upstream hydropower development may provide the opportunity for increasing riparian country irrigation development without impacting or touching the present LMB baseline low flow regime, which the four countries have agreed to 75

96 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues protect. This means that massive investments in irrigation will be made on the basis that these increased flows from upstream will be secure and occur into the future. It is thus very important that protocols, understandings or agreements whatever are appropriate be established between the MRC and China to give some certainty to these enhanced dry season flows. Otherwise the risks and uncertainty could also be significant The Uncertainties of Sediment Reduction Dams both regulate the flow and they fragment the river, hindering fish migration and sediment movement and throughput. Some argued that the BDS focused too much on regulation and did not give enough attention to fragmentation. Sediment transport is said to have already decreased in the last 15 years. Experts contend that these changes are not related to changes in hydrology, hydraulics, or climate change but to lower amounts of sediment entering the river system, due in part to trapping from dams on the tributaries and in the upper basin, as well as sand mining. Although we now know much more about sediments than four years ago, experts seem to agree that there are uncertainties with all this sediment data yet it is one of the key impact areas when assessing the various development scenarios. The present studies from the first BDS plus more information from the MRC Council Study and Mekong Delta Study will all improve the knowledge of sediment behaviour in the Mekong Basin but uncertainties will still remain and these will be a priority in an updated BDS but it still requires the scientists and sediment experts to take this improved data and jointly work to reduce the variability or 76

97 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues scatter and to convert this to information and ultimately to improved knowledge so that the water resource planners and managers have more realistic and robust information against which to judge development impacts Concern about the Effectiveness of the MRC Consultation Procedures A view was expressed that many stakeholders, and some of the Member Countries, saw ambiguities and uncertainties in the PNPCA process, which presented difficulties for the MRCS. The MRCS have compiled lessons learnt from recent PNPCA processes from which the idea of the MRC Joint Platform emerged. This concept has proceeded slowly and needs to be given priority in the updated BDS Benefit Sharing Lessons from International and Local Experiences Two key points are: 1. That water issues and sharing, and in particular cost and benefit sharing, can be a catalyst for cooperation rather than a major source of conflict a positive not a negative. 2. The need for a cooperative approach becomes more important with the degree of hydrologic variability in a river basin, that is, countries with simple hydrology and high investments in water security tend to have high incomes, but the more the variability, the more the need for urgent water conservation works to even out risks to society, and the more pressure on national governments to quickly solve their own problems or act nationally rather than more cost effective and fairer regional solutions. 77

98 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues Benefit sharing will work best when the concept of benefit is very broad and includes innovative ideas and solutions. It should not just be confined to the river but go well beyond to include such things as oil/gas pipelines, road links, railway links, inland water transport and port access. Benefits far away from the river and not directly related to water might be the winning factor in securing a country s endorsement for a project. The followings are discussion during the Forum: Benefit sharing must primarily be up to the four countries to promote and the MRC can only be a catalyst or coordinator. Maximising national interests and benefits are still the driving issues and underpin discussion and projects of a regional nature countries cooperate when they see benefits. Guidelines on cost and benefit sharing should be formulated so countries can better understand how all can benefit from a regional approach. There is no blue print or standard approach for cost and benefit sharing. It is important to work together in developing sharing options; these issues are difficult for any multi-country organisation and it is important to start now by working together rather than keep waiting for the perfect sharing approach, which probably doesn t exist. In other basins, benefit sharing usually involves two or more countries coming together to invest (share costs) and share benefits of joint development projects. Cost and benefit sharing is a key part of the decision making process but in the end it is still only a part of a total package of information and national political and policy and objectives that the decision-makers must use to find the best balanced and most acceptable outcome for any project. It is always best to look within the region for successful examples of benefit sharing as these are likely to reflect the regional culture and values for example Power Development Fund in Thailand. Cumulative assessment of national plans, as done in the first BDS, allowed us to estimate broad benefits and costs to each country in a very participatory manner but merely assessing impacts of national plans is not benefit sharing. There is a need to communicate clearly that scenarios, and the broad benefits and costs associated with them, are not necessarily a reality they are just possible options, possible pictures of the future Engaging with the Private Sector a New Way of Doing Business? The private sector is increasingly becoming the engine of competitive solutions in achieving optimal and sustainable outcomes and can help finance and address sustainability challenges. But, at the same time, it has been shown that without genuine private sector engagement at all stages of relevant policy and strategy development, and in formulating rules, guidelines and procedures, it is unlikely that fully effective solutions will occur. A strategy or guideline cannot be developed and given to private sector without their effective participation in their development. 78

99 Chapter 4 Synthesis of Dialogues Private developers and investors have a basic interest and role to play in how new policies evolve as they are the ones that have to live within the policy and implement innovative solutions. Meaningful engagement will provide opportunities to identify strategic financing to meet the needs of the BDS. For the MRC and its Member Countries, a key point of contact could be the Hydropower Developers Working Group in Lao PDR or similar mechanisms in other countries. The MRC could consider joining the Working Group, or at least have a regular dialogue with the group. 79

100 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes 80

101 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes 5 THE FORUM OUTCOMES GUIDING THE UPDATED BASIN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY 5.1 Key Messages in Detail The Mekong River: globally important and complex The Mekong River, by global standards, is both of great importance and also highly complex, due to its highly variable inter- and intra-annual flows. This complex variability creates significant risks as well as significant opportunities. These risks are growing as populations and economies grow and climate change advances, putting more people and assets in harm s way, as recent floods in the region have demonstrated. Assessing and mitigating these risks requires early action, as solutions will become much more difficult and costly with time and continuing uncoordinated development. Ripe for joint development and benefit sharing: adequate information exists Experience from other regions indicates that sooner or later joint management and development, with cost and benefit sharing deals, will be necessary if the people of the Mekong Basin are to fulfil their aspirations and potential in a long-term balance with the river. Early action is possible due to the MRC s significant investment in data and knowledge that makes the Lower Mekong Basin more prepared than most basins that have already reached such deals. The MRC is in the position now to identify joint and/or basin-wide development and cost and benefit sharing options. Balance basin development and protection National plans for water resources development are sub-optimal at the basin level. As they do not often take a basin perspective, they can lead to missed development opportunities and environmental losses at the basin level. The MRC is mandated to work with all countries to identify plans and projects that increase water, food, and energy security, reduce risks and protect environmental assets across the basin. In doing this, the MRC needs to allow and promote broad-based stakeholder engagement to examine development options, costs, benefits and trade-offs that may need to be considered by riparian governments, individually and collectively. Optimal development is used to mean full potential of sustainable benefits from a basin wide perspective The word optimal was used to paraphrase the Articles 1 and 2 of the 1995 Mekong Agreement: the development of the full potential of sustainable benefits to all riparian countries and the prevention of wasteful use of Mekong River Basin waters. An optimal solution cannot be achieved by resource optimization only. A best direction of joint development can be agreed upon, as a result of a negotiation process. All solutions are 81

102 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes provisional and requiring adaptation to change. Information sharing and trust are critical in this process. Cooperation combines the comparative advantages of different Lower Mekong Basin countries for mutual benefit All Lower Mekong Basin countries have different comparative advantages due to their position within the basin. Joint planning, management and development provide the potential to mitigate risks and develop opportunities in a way that increases benefits for all parties. While this is never easy to achieve, taking steps along this pathway will provide positive feedback in terms of building trust and creating new opportunities. The MRC has the mandate in the 1995 Mekong Agreement to identify and promote such steps in joint and basin-wide projects. Dialogue Partners: engagement growing and appreciated The Chinese representative made a clear commitment to continue and strengthen regular communication, information sharing and technical exchange. This was greatly appreciated by the MRC and Forum. The Chinese perspective that all riparian countries, whether upstream or downstream, have responsibility to sustainably develop and manage the river was also welcomed. The Myanmar representative welcomes further cooperation with the MRC in the future as it faces many challenges developing its water resources. Perceptions matter Even though Mekong knowledge creation has been considerable, broad-based consensus and common understanding on key information is often lacking. This results in different perceptions across stakeholder groups, which can feed mistrust and affect regional relations. The MRC is mandated to promote common knowledge and understanding among all stakeholders, through providing evidence and raising awareness related to the river and to management and development benefits, impacts and risks. It is an important element of MRC s coordination and facilitation role to promote cooperation. Poverty and gender The BDS should better reflect the imperative of poverty alleviation and gender aspects of development in its strategic intent. Whilst long-term changes in the rural socio-economy may reduce the numbers of vulnerable resource users in the future, there is a clear need for the MRC in the short to medium term to promote food security and pro-poor development in its sector strategies for water resources development. Regarding gender, actionable guidelines could be developed for the MRC and its Member Countries to reduce existing inequalities and promote gender-responsive and effective water governance systems, policies and strategies. Sediments: an underestimated resource for a productive Mekong Delta Sediment transport is critical for a stable and productive river delta. Studies on the Mekong Delta show: (1) sand plays a critical role but is often lacking in management plans and is at the same time a valuable resource for the construction sector, (2) reduced sediment transport due to dams and sand mining are leading to river bed deepening and coastal erosion, (3) nutrient delivery from the river to the delta are already drastically reduced. These findings demonstrate the high sensitivity to change of the Mekong ecosystem. Changes in the Mekong Delta morphology call for immediate attention to better understand and mitigate these trends, including establishment of a detailed basin wide sediment budget. 82

103 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes Institutionalized stakeholder engagement All of the above areas are best addressed through an institutionalized mechanism for stakeholder engagement. This could take the form of strengthened stakeholder participation in MRC Governance Meetings and/or a Regional Stakeholder Platform to engage regularly in the preparation and implementation of the MRC strategic plans. Also, specific approaches and mechanisms under the Platform tailored to each group of stakeholders could be considered, such as the setting up of a stakeholder working group specifically for the private sector (since investment from the private sector now outweighs those of the public sector in all MRC sectors), for civil society or for research institutes. A more institutionalized and systematic stakeholder engagement will also require further improvement of MRC s knowledge management and communications. Improving and tightening the draft Basin Development Strategy for In addition to the above points, the preparation of the next draft of the updated Basin Development Strategy could take into account the following suggestions: 1. Incorporate a strategic vision and better defined objectives. 2. Clearly make the BDS a basin strategy prescribing actions to be done, but not mixing strategy and action plan. Write the BDS for policy makers, urging action based on a sense of urgency. 3. The implementation of the BDS for sits uneasily within Chapter 1. Consider a separate, short chapter on the experiences and lessons learnt from the implementation of the previous BDS. Add to this Chapter, the progress of the implementation of the Development opportunities, which is presented in Section Combine Chapter 2 (State of the Basin) with the development outlook in Section 3.1 into a Chapter entitled development trends and outlook. 5. Streamline and further improve the remainder of Chapter 3 (development needs, opportunities and risks), including an assessment of the risks and uncertainties related to infrastructure development. 6. Relate Chapter 4 (Basin Development Strategy), through a new Section 4.1, strongly with the analysis of the needs, opportunities and risks in Chapter Merge the current Sections 4.2 and 4.3 on basin development priorities and basin management priorities. 8. Perceived weaknesses regarding cooperation mechanisms (including the PNPCA) need to be better analysed (in Chapter 3) and addressed in Chapter Strengthen the distribution of responsibilities for implementation in the Strategy, including the role of research organizations. 10. Better describe the monitoring of the Strategy implementation at the basin level through the State of Basin reporting system. 83

104 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes 5.2 Guidance for the BDS Update General impressions What was very clear from the interactive sessions throughout the Forum is that all levels and groups of stakeholders want more and better consultation mechanisms with the MRC and the Member Countries better and greater stakeholder and basin community consultation received high attention. The views expressed were many and varied. The MRC hears this message all points made will be carefully considered and we will work hard to find the best package of consultation mechanisms that meet the varied needs of the Mekong Basin. This is covered in some detail in the synthesis discussion of Session 4, earlier in these proceedings. The discussions on scenario formulation and assessment again reflect the wide points of view, but also the value of the scenario approach. There are those who maintain that not enough emphasis is given to impact areas such as food security (though some say this cannot be just about fisheries), livelihood issues or environmental protection in the scenarios and their assessments, and that quite different results would occur if say, environmental protection was the main focus of the scenarios. Others argue that these impact areas are in fact, the governing or constraining parts of the scenario assessment process and therefore tend to control how a scenario could, or could not, move forward, and thus have a very large influence. What everyone agrees is that we need better information about the stress or behaviour responses of the basin s natural and people resources to development pressures and that closing the key knowledge gaps must be a priority for the next edition of the BDS and probably for many future editions as well. A post-forum comment seems relevant here. The BDS is a development strategy and that is what the four countries agreed to create it is not an environmental protection strategy with socio-economic impacts added on, or it is not a poverty alleviation strategy with economic/environmental impacts added on, but it is a water related development strategy that is broadly judged by the balance of its economic benefits and by its socio-environmental impacts. The MRC does need to do more work on better understanding, and fine tuning, the impact side of this balancing act this is beyond dispute and the priorities in the updated strategy will reflect this. The better and stronger are the impact assessment criteria, the better will be the development packages that pass the test of acceptability and sustainability. But we need to keep all this in focus and not forget that we are talking about a balanced Basin Development Strategy and not something else. The active and continuing involvement of China is a positive development in the overall Mekong basin cooperation initiatives. There is already intensive communication with the MRC and four Member Countries and technical and water management information is continually being exchanged. Central to this information exchange is the matter of increased dry season flow coming from the upstream hydropower developments in China. Massive investments in irrigation are planned in the lower basin. The Forum stressed It is thus very important that protocols, understandings or agreements whatever are appropriate be established between the MRC and China to give some certainty to these enhanced dry season flows. This must be seen as a priority area for joint cooperation. And does MRC need more information and analytical tools? Some argue that after 15 years or so since the 1995 Mekong Agreement was signed, we have more than enough data and analytical tools for guiding good basin development and management. Others argue that as 84

105 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes the basin continues to change, along with the lifestyles and ambitions of its people, we must continue to collect data and create meaningful information from it, so that the various basin assessments and development scenarios are based on the best possible and most current information. No basin organisation ever has all the information and analytical tools that it needs; it is all about doing the best with improved data and tools that are guided by clear priority setting and available funds. The MRC appears to have a much better than average data and information bank and a realistic and effective set of analytical tools. The issue may not be one of costly upgrades right now, but more of ensuring adequate numbers of people in all the countries are maintained, that can understand and access the information and use the present modelling tools and analytical systems. New modelling tools are very expensive to develop and implement and can often outrun the ability of the operators and basin planners and managers to properly utilise them. Perhaps in the past not enough attention has been given to creating and maintaining these skills at the national level. Trust and open cooperation comes from each country being able to first make its own assessments and form its own views, and it can t do this unless it has resources to undertake its own work. This will be a careful balancing act for BDS priorities. Notwithstanding the importance of these strong national capabilities, decision making on basin-wide issues and outcomes will always be the result of negotiation, and a mix of give and take. The better the information, tools and assessments, together with local stakeholder knowledge and inputs, that can be provided to decision makers, the more balanced, better and acceptable will be the outcomes. And is adequate attention been given to the vulnerable and marginalised people of the basin. The possible impacts on capture fisheries, particularly in Cambodia and Viet Nam, from changes in mainstream flow regime, sediment behaviour and the blocking effect of dams, are very significant, and whilst high economic benefits are likely from new developments, the vulnerable people who rely on fisheries and natural resources are unlikely to receive benefits, just undesirable impacts. What acceptable changes in lifestyle and livelihoods can be implemented for these affected groups, what would they want and how will studies about sensible and effective options be developed in partnership with these groups? Specific Issues for the BDS Update The first BDS concentrated on evaluating the broad benefits and impacts arising from the cumulative assessments of projects within the present four national plans. This was a logical approach as it gave the four countries a measurement of just what might occur if national plans were implemented. There were clearly substantial economic benefits but also significant adverse transboundary environmental and social impacts, and the distribution of these benefits and costs between the four countries were seen by some communities, stakeholders and country agencies as not being reasonable and equitable. The updated strategy must broaden these development concepts and possibilities from the cumulative assessments of national plans/projects, to a longer term perspective and to include possible joint or multi-country projects with comprehensive and innovative benefit sharing and cost minimising initiatives. But the Forum stressed that simply looking further into the future for formulating and assessing packages of both national and joint/multi-country projects will continue to be challenged if much greater effort is not placed on closing the important knowledge gaps. Particular emphasis must be placed on the impacts of developments on the 85

106 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes marginalised or vulnerable people, and on the key natural resource parameters that are fundamental to the basin s overall health and well-being. The draft BDS update has seven strategic priorities for basin development and management. They have been identified as the following: For Basin Development, Regional joint cooperation and interdependent development increased, Essential knowledge to address development uncertainty and minimise risks acquired, Basin-wide optimal development for multiple use and mutual benefits in water and related sectors enhanced, and National water resources development improved. For Basin Management, Basin management procedures and processes strengthened, Protection and management of mutually agreed environmental assets strengthened, and Information management, communications and impact monitoring tools maintained and enhanced. The Forum had mixed comment about these priorities but there seemed to be agreement that the key issue here was what activities were planned under each of the seven strategic priorities and what involvement would stakeholder groups have in commenting on these, and on the progress of whatever activities are decided upon. This relates to the question what might be the best approach for stakeholder engagement to address emerging conditions? Some groups such as some NGO s are requesting much better engagement so future consultation processes must consider the varied need of these many different groups. MRC s in-house cooperation must have a greater emphasis on supporting the Member Countries in the transition of the MRC to the decentralised model and to become financially independent of donor support. The MRCS must be lean and mean and focus on the core functions of basin management, and at the same time, supporting the assessment and evaluation of the varying development priorities of each country. And the role of the national agencies must be more clearly defined along with how the basin wide priorities and joint projects are harmonised with the content of national plans. The updated strategy must give a lot of attention to the work needed over the next 5 years to enable a successful move to decentralisation activities. The Forum identified a number of areas of concern arising from the progress with the first BDS. While all issues are important to one group or another, not all are of equal importance, and there has to be some critical review and discussion at the national level as to what has the highest priorities water planning and management human resources and related funds are limited and not everything can be worked on together. Issues such as drought management, groundwater, flood protection studies and works, poverty and gender issues, more work on sediment and fisheries issues, and farmer education to keep pace with new irrigation schemes and technologies, are all areas that require attention but probably cannot all be supported at the same time. This is a challenge for the updated BDS and for national priorities and objectives. 86

107 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes And the private sector It is becoming increasingly part of the solution for achieving sustainable outcomes and can help finance and address sustainability challenges. But, at the same time, it has been shown that without genuine private sector engagement at all stages of relevant policy and strategy development, and in formulating financing rules, guidelines and procedures, it is unlikely that fully effective solutions will occur. The issue for the BDS will be what is the most effective form of engagement with the private sector and can this be helped or facilitated by groups such as the International Finance Corporation (IFC), which already has strong links with the private sector. How Forum messages and comments are addressed in the BDS draft? KEY MESSAGES HOW AND WHERE THEY ARE ADDRESSED? The Mekong river: globally important and complex The Mekong River, by global standards, is both of great importance and also highly complex, due to its highly variable inter- and intra-annual flows. This complex variability creates significant risks as well as significant opportunities. These risks are growing as populations and economies grow and climate change advances, putting more people and assets in harm s way, as recent floods in the region have demonstrated. Assessing and mitigating these risks requires early action, as solutions will become much more difficult and costly with time and continuing uncoordinated development. Included in section 1.2 (need for strategy update), p 2. Ripe for joint development and benefit sharing: adequate information exists Experience from other regions indicates that sooner or later joint management and development, with cost and benefit sharing deals, will be necessary if the people of the Mekong are to fulfill their aspirations and potential in a long-term balance with the river. Early action is possible due to MRC s significant investment in data and knowledge that makes the LMB more prepared than most basins that have already reached such deals. The MRC is in the position now to identify joint and/or basin-wide development and cost and benefit sharing options. Included in section 1.2 (need for strategy update, p 2) as well as in section (joint development and benefit sharing challenge, p 27) and section (Strategic Priority, p 34). 87

108 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes KEY MESSAGES HOW AND WHERE THEY ARE ADDRESSED? Balance basin development and protection National plans for water resources development are sub-optimal at the basin level. As they do not often take a basin perspective, they can lead to missed development opportunities and environmental losses at the basin level. The MRC is mandated to work with all countries to identify plans and projects that increase water, food, and energy security, reduce risks and protect environmental assets across the basin. In doing this, the MRC needs to allow and promote broad-based stakeholder engagement to examine development options, costs, benefits and trade-offs that may need to be considered by riparian governments, individually and collectively. Included in section (optimise basin wide sustainable development, p 34) as well as section (implementing development opportunities, p 39-40). Optimal development is used to mean full potential of sustainable benefits from a basin wide perspective The word optimal was used to paraphrase Article 1 and part of Article 2 of the 1995 Agreement: the development of the full potential of sustainable benefits to all riparian States and the prevention of wasteful use of Mekong River Basin waters. An optimal solution cannot be achieved by resource optimization only. A best direction of joint development can be agreed upon, as a result of a negotiation process. All solutions are provisional, requiring adaptation to change. Information sharing and trust are critical in this process. Included in the glossary as well as section (optimise basin wide sustainable development, p 34). Perceptions matter Even though Mekong knowledge creation has been considerable, broad-based consensus and common understanding on key information is often lacking. This results in different perceptions across stakeholder groups, which can feed mistrust and affect Included in section (knowledge and information management and communication, p 30). 88

109 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes KEY MESSAGES HOW AND WHERE THEY ARE ADDRESSED? regional relations. The MRC is mandated to promote common knowledge and understanding among all stakeholders, through providing evidence and raising awareness related to the river and to management and development benefits, impacts and risks. It is an important element of MRC s coordination and facilitation role to promote cooperation. Poverty and gender The BDS should better reflect the imperative of poverty alleviation and gender aspects of development, in its strategic intent. Whilst long-term changes in the rural socio-economy may reduce the numbers of vulnerable resource users in the future, there is a clear need for the MRC in the short to medium term to promote food security and pro-poor development in its sector strategies for water resources development. Regarding gender, actionable guidelines could be developed for the MRC and its Member Countries to reduce existing inequalities and promote genderresponsive and effective water governance systems, policies and strategies. Included and enhanced in new section (assessing and mitigating water related poverty, p 28) and the new section (gender sensitive development, p 30). Institutionalized stakeholder engagement All of the above areas are best addressed through an institutionalized mechanism for stakeholder engagement. This could take the form of strengthened stakeholder participation in MRC Governance Meetings and/or a Regional Stakeholder Platform to engage regularly in the preparation and implementation of the MRC strategic plans. Also, specific approaches and mechanisms under the Platform tailored to each group of stakeholders could be considered, such as the setting up of a stakeholder working group specifically for the private sector (since investment from the private sector now outweighs those of the public sector in all MRC sectors), for civil society or for research Included in elaborated section (engagement during strategic planning, p 43), sections and (engagement during regional operations and during national operations, p 44) and the new section (summary of stakeholder roles, p 44-45). 89

110 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes KEY MESSAGES HOW AND WHERE THEY ARE ADDRESSED? institutes. A more institutionalized and systematic stakeholder engagement will also require further improvement of MRC s knowledge management and communications. Sediments Sediment transport is critical for a stable and productive river delta. Studies on the Mekong delta show: (i) sand plays a critical role but is often lacking in management plans and is at the same time a valuable resource for the construction sector, (ii) reduced sediment transport due to dams and sand mining are leading to river bed deepening and coastal erosion, (iii) nutrient delivery from the river to the delta are already drastically reduced. These findings demonstrate the high sensitivity to change of the Mekong ecosystem. Changes in the Mekong delta morphology call for immediate attention to better understand and mitigate these trends, including establishment of a detailed basin wide sediment budget. Main points included in section (pp 17-18). Improving and tightening the draft Basin Development Strategy for In addition to the above points, the preparation of the next draft of the updated Strategy could take into account the following suggestions. 1. Incorporate a strategic vision and better defined objectives. 2. Clearly make the BDS a basin strategy prescribing actions to be done, but not mixing strategy and action plan. Write the BDS for policy makers, urging action based on a sense of urgency. 3. The implementation of the BDS for sits uneasily within Chapter 1. Consider a separate, short chapter on the experiences and Done, as follows: 1. See section 1.2 (p 3). 2. See section 1.2 need for strategy update (p 2-3). 3. Retains with another format in section 1.4 for implementation of the strategy during (p 5-8) and progress on implementation of 90

111 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes KEY MESSAGES lessons learnt from the implementation of the previous BDS. Add to this chapter the progress of the implementation of the Development opportunities which is presented in Section Combine Chapter 2 (State of the Basin) with the Development outlook in Section 3.1 into a chapter entitled Development trends and outlook. 5. Streamline and further improve the remainder of Chapter 3 (Development needs, opportunities and risks), including an assessment of the risks and uncertainties related to infrastructure development. 6. Relate Chapter 4 (Basin Development Strategy), through a new Section 4.1, strongly with the analysis of the needs, opportunities and risks in Chapter Merge the current Sections 4.2 and 4.3 on basin development priorities and basin management priorities. 8. Perceived weaknesses regarding cooperation mechanisms (including PNPCA) need to be better analyzed (in Chapter 3) and addressed in Chapter Strengthen the distribution of responsibilities for implementation in the Strategy, including the role of research organizations. 10. Better describe the monitoring of the Strategy implementation at the basin level through the state of basin reporting system. HOW AND WHERE THEY ARE ADDRESSED? development opportunities in section (main changes since 2011, p 11). 4. Done, in section 2.3 (p 12-18). 5. Done. Structure is now much more logic and number of pages reduced by two. 6. Done. Description of Strategic Priorities improved to make clear link to addressing needs, trade-offs and challenges/risks. 7. Done. Basin development priorities and basin management priorities now merged (section 4.2, p 32-38). 8. Description of this strategic challenge has improved (section p 26-27) and it is also addressed in the Strategic Priority on strengthening basin-wide procedures and national implementation capacity (section 4.2.4, p 35-36). 9. Done, see section 5.4.4, table with stakeholder roles (p 44-45). 10. Done, see section 5.5 (p 45-46). 91

112 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes Additional comments from Development Partners (as of 17 December 2014) KEY POINTS HOW AND WHERE THEY ARE ADDRESSED? BDS should include strong vision statement and scope of strategy for the whole basin not just MRC. Done. See section 1.2 (p 3). The NIPs are a key mechanism to ensure successful decentralization of MRC functions to MCs. The BDS should highlight how the countries should use the plans to mainstream decentralisation into national policies, strategies and plans. Done. See section 5.3 (p 42). Hydropower and energy security should receive a stronger focus in the document. This issue has been prominently addressed in the following sections need for strategy update (p 2) main changes since 2011 (p 11-12) energy trends and outlook (p 13) fisheries trends and outlook (p 16) sediments trends and outlook (p 17-18) food and livelihood security (p 21-22) energy security (p 23) basin-wide assessment of national plans, including potential positive and negative impacts of hydropower (p 23-24) balancing economic benefits and social and environmental protection (p 25) balancing mainstream and tributary hydropower (p 25) joint development and benefit sharing (p 27) tributary hydropower development (p 31) mainstream hydropower development (p 32) And the following Strategic Priorities and Actions. 92

113 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes KEY POINTS HOW AND WHERE THEY ARE ADDRESSED? reduce knowledge gaps to minimise risks including study on capture fisheries, rural livelihoods, biodiversity (p 33) optimise basin-wide sustainable development and benefit sharing including basin-wide strategy for sustainable hydropower (p34) strengthen protection of agreed environmental assets (p 35) strengthen basin-wide procedures (p 35-36) improve national water resources development including implementing guidance for mainstream dams and tributary dams (p 36) strengthen cooperation with partners and stakeholders including with China on operation of Lancang hydropower dams (p 37) Trade-off elements are very welcome but could benefit from better treatment of nexus issues. Need for nexus thinking is now noted for the assessment and subsequent discussions and decision-making on all trade-offs (section 3.3, 24-26) and in the Strategic Priority (p 34). Poverty analysis should be strengthened and a guiding consideration for future development. The next strategy process should take a longer timespan with truly strategic targets. Done. Poverty issues are highlighted in the following sections poverty trends and outlooks (p 15) food and livelihood security (p 21-22) assessing and mitigating water related poverty (p 26) gender sensitive development (p 30) The BDS is a basin strategy for the medium term (10-15 years) but with information on assessment, perspectives, and Strategic Actions updated every five years due to rapid changes in the basin. 93

114 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes KEY POINTS HOW AND WHERE THEY ARE ADDRESSED? As indicated in section 5.5 monitoring, evaluation and reporting strategic indicators of the MRC Indicator Framework would be used to measure the impact of the BDS implementation every five years (p 45-46). Additional comments from the Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) Further detailed comments can be found in Annex C Feedback from participants. KEY POINTS HOW AND WHERE THEY ARE ADDRESSED? Sense of urgency lacking This has been addressed by adding a section in the beginning of the BDS called: Need for strategy update. An executive summary has been added. Vision and outcomes We added the MRC s vision for the basin: economically prosperous, socially just and environmentally sound. In terms of outcomes, the BDS is a high level strategy that will be monitored in terms of its impact using the strategic indicators of the state of basin report. This outcome/impact aspect has been elaborated in the section on monitoring. Priorities and optimising The current development opportunity (space) has been identified based on previous MRC cumulative assessment of national plans of the riparians. Updated scenario assessments under the Council Study and the new Strategic Plan will offer valuable information in terms of the distribution of benefits, impacts, costs and risks (including limits of acceptable change) past, present and future; and whether opportunities lie in optimising basin wide sustainable benefits, reducing transboundary costs and meet water security in the long run. 94

115 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes KEY POINTS HOW AND WHERE THEY ARE ADDRESSED? The strategic actions in the draft BDS has been reduced. Transparency and public engagement Targeted stakeholder engagement will be developed under the regional stakeholder platform. Comments and submissions on the draft BDS are published in this Forum report. Strategic guidance is provided in the BDS for NIP preparation. However, a more detailed guideline has been prepared by the MRCS. A roadmap for implementation has been added. Role of MRCS and others Valuable advices that can be considered as MRC transitions into core functions based organisation not programmes based. 5.3 Implications for MRC Stakeholder Engagement What is the best format and approach for better stakeholder involvement? All comments at the Forum were specific on this need but as was emphasised by some no matter what level and coverage, and what level and frequency of engagement is introduced it is never enough. There is much to learn (what would, what not) from how some of the older and more mature basin organisations go about consultation. The MRC already has strong relations with a number of large RBO s (Murray-Darling and Mississippi) and we will link with them to bring together their experiences with the desires and ambitions of our basin community. It is true that as stakeholders become more informed and better understand the behaviour of a basin s resources both natural resources and its people there are increasing desires to know more and to be more strongly involved in basin management. The MRC must and will respond to these desires. A regional stakeholder platform is being proposed but this will need to look closely at the best way to interact with the wide variety of stakeholders within the basin and how to best manage the very wide cross-section of views from these groups. As occurs in most developing river basins, the range of views and opinions are as broad as the spectrum varying from black to white and having one peak level stakeholder group may not necessarily provide the most effective, or satisfying the platform for consultation. 95

116 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes However it must be realised and accepted that consultation within a country is a national issue and the policies and practices of each country will determine just how consultation will occur. The MRC can assist by facilitating discussion on common grounds and processes for involving stakeholders and civil society, and in return, these stakeholder groups must respect the right of each country to conduct consultation and participation as is appropriate to its customs and policies. 5.4 Feed-back on the Forum by participants All participants were asked to complete a questionnaire that sought their response to whether the Forum met their expectations. They were asked to rate the performance or responses to range of issues or questions for each of the separate sessions Session 1 Getting Engaged, the presentation and reply components of Session 3, and the synthesis session that brought all the discussions together into a focused report. Hundred and nineteen feedback sheets were received and the results are presented in Annex C Feedback from participants. The rating system used was: 1. Improvement needed or presentation insufficient, 2. Presentations and replies generally fair to OK, 3. Presentations and replies to questions good, and 4. All aspects excellent. The need to make major changes or improvements to the format of any future Forum should come from the number and type of responses within categories 1 and 2 above these two categories can be considered the unsatisfactory levels of performance. These two categories reflect dissatisfaction levels of some or all factors for the particular question asked. That is, wherever a rating is 1 or 2, the participant believes the presentation/content of the reply is just fair or insufficient, and if there are large numbers of participants giving these low ratings (say more than 30%) then this is a sure indication that improvements should be made in future forums. For the plenary session nine questions were asked and the average dissatisfaction levels (Categories 1 and 2) were about 20% with a peak of 30% relating to presentations on the upper Mekong developments. It could be argued that this implies that one third of the participants felt the presentation on the upper Mekong is somehow not that important to allow active participation in the Forum. Yet in the discussions across all of the Forum and in the formulation of the key messages stronger cooperation with China was targeted as a priority issue as was the formalizing, in some form, an agreement on the enhanced dry season flows that will underpin irrigation expansion. The views from this 30% would need further discussion before drawing any conclusion about upstream issues. Overall, about 80% were happy with the plenary session. Sessions 3a, 3b and 3c all had the same six questions asked and all generally had similar responses participants were 80% satisfied ( good to excellent ) with the exception that within session 3b, for the issue questions were well responded to, 40% were somewhat unhappy with responses/replies. The issues being discussed related to benefit sharing and the presentations were all very detailed. Other technical presentations in the other sessions also had slightly higher levels of unhappiness. The message here is that for detailed technical 96

117 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes presentations, or perhaps those covering complex new ideas, more time should be allowed for discussion to ensure all queries are answered and any uncertainties or confusion resolved. The Session of Synthesis of Results/Discussions is perhaps the most important in reflecting the participants views as this was a chance to sort out any problems and queries. Only few (between 10% and 18%) were dissatisfied within the five categories of questions asked, which suggests that most key concerns had been resolved; if there were issues of a technical nature that were of concern, as suggested in the replies for Session 3b, then they appear to have been mostly clarified. Overall, satisfaction levels are quite high about 80% of replies in the good to excellent category and the only obvious message for a future Forum is to allow flexibility in the timing of sessions so that uncertainties can be resolved, or alternatively, allow for discussions corners during lunch or free time, where experts make themselves available for informal talks on any issues of concern. 5.5 Recommendations for the next Forum A key message of this Regional Stakeholder Forum is to institutionalize stakeholder engagement in the MRC, amongst others through the development of an MRC Stakeholder Platform that will engage regularly in the preparation and implementation of the strategic documents, such as the 5-yearly State of Basin Report and the IWRM-based Basin Development Strategy. It is recommended that a concept note will be prepared and discussed in 2015 that sets out the role, responsibilities and main activities of an MRC Stakeholder Platform. The next Forum in 2016 could then initiate the MRC Stakeholder Platform. A major Forum in 2016 would be timely as Mekong Basin Planning in will require the consideration of difficult trade-offs and the identification of acceptable pathways that could increase regional benefits, mitigate regional costs, and provide flood, energy, food, environment and climate security in an equitable manner through cooperation. It will also require close consideration of a range of complementary measures that may be needed to offset or mitigate the impacts of agreed development. 97

118 BDP Team: from left Dr. Paradis Someth, Mr. Phetsamone Southalack, Dr. Anoulak Kittikhoun, Ms. Praivan Limbanboon, Ms. Soukouman Viravong, Dr. Phattareeya Suanrattanachai, Ms. Southida Salaphan, Ms. Chitthina Misaiphon, Mr. Hoy Ros (and Mr. Ton Lennaerts, who is absent in this photo). Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes 98

119 Chapter 5 The Forum Outcomes 99

120 Annex A Forum Booklet ANNEX A FORUM BOOKLET Institutions joining the 4 th Regional Stakeholder Forum Cambodia Lao PDR Thailand Viet Nam Cambodia National Mekong Committee Lao National Mekong Committee Thai National Mekong Committee Viet Nam National Mekong Committee Ministry of Water Resource and Meteorology Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Ministry of Planning Cambodia Agricultural Research and Development Institute Cambodian Center for Study and Development in Agriculture (CEDAC) Documentation Center of Cambodia Fisheries Action Coalition Team Ministry of Energy and Mines Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ministry of Planning and Investment Ministry of Public Work and Transportation Nam Ngum RBO Nam Thuen-Kading RBO Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives Ministry of Energy Ministry of Foreign Affairs National Economic and Social Development Board Foundation of Integrated Water Resources Management Huay Saneng Subbasin Loei Sub-basin Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development Ministry of Planning and Investment Electricity of Viet Nam Research Institute for Aquaculture No. 2 An Giang University Can Tho University Khmer Farmer Association Institute of Technology of Cambodia Learning Institute The NGO Forum on Cambodia Oxfam Nonghan- Kumphawapi Subbasin Rak Chiang Khong Fisheries Conservation Group Thai Environment Institute PACT Cambodia Royal University of Agriculture 100

121 Annex A Forum Booklet Development Partners Asian Development Bank Australia European Union (EU) Finland Germany Sweden Switzerland United States of America Private Sector Asia Clean Innovations Charoen Energy and Water Asia DHI Italian-Thai Development Lancang Hydropower Corporation Nam Ngiep 1 Power Company Nam Theun 2 Power Company Sinohydro Tideland Signal Dialogue Partners China Myanmar Regional and International Organizations Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) CGIAR International Finance Corporation (IFC) World Bank Group Mekong Institute (MI) Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) Regional and International Institutes and Non- Governmental Organizations ewater Institute Darul Ridzuan International Rivers (IRN) International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) International Water Management Institute (IWMI) Mekong Water Technology Innovation Institute Monash Sustainability Institute, Monash University Program on Water, Land, and Ecosystems (WLE) Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) Asia Stockholm International Water Institute Tsinghua University University of Newcastle, Australia WorldFish WWF Greater Mekong 101

122 Annex A Forum Booklet FORUM DESCRIPTION INTRODUCTION In January 2011, the Mekong River Commission s Member Countries, Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Viet Nam, adopted their first ever Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM)-based Basin Development Strategy (BDS). It constitutes an important milestone in the history of Mekong cooperation. The BDS sets out the shared understanding of the development opportunities and associated risks in the Lower Mekong Basin (LMB), taking into account developments in the Upper Mekong-Lancang in China. The BDS then establishes strategic priorities to capture development opportunities and minimise risks. Implementation of the BDS has resulted in a greater awareness and knowledge of development issues and increased appreciation of the benefits to be derived from cooperation. Transparency and data and information exchanges between many national and regional actors are increasing. Studies and surveys by MRC and others are reducing knowledge gaps for basin development planning and decision-making. Considerable progress has been made on understanding sediment issues. Investments have been leveraged for development projects and technical assistance. Last, but not least, the MRC has adopted a major reform initiative to streamline its strategic planning and organisational structure. In line with the Declaration of the 2 nd MRC Summit by the Prime Ministers of the MRC Countries held on 5 April 2014, the current Basin Development Strategy is being updated to move basin development towards more sustainable outcomes. The current BDS is based on a cumulative assessment of the existing national water resources development plans of the Mekong basin countries. Under these plans, for instance, major environmental assets in the Mekong basin are currently not protected. Similarly, little protection against extreme floods is in place for the densely populated Mekong delta. Moreover, the benefits from basin development may not be viewed as equitably distributed. However, these plans could be optimised from a longer-term and basin-wide perspective, with a view to increasing national benefits for all countries and minimising adverse transboundary impacts. Given this limitation of the current development plans, new basin-wide development scenarios are being formulated, benefit sharing options are being identified and assessed, and the Basin Development Strategy updated. Many actors and stakeholders are engaged in these activities through working groups and consultation meetings at the local, national and regional levels. This Regional Forum offers an opportunity to bring together experts, government officials, representatives from civil society, the private sector, Development Partners of the MRC, and the media, among others, to review basin development planning and to discuss the ways and means to move towards more optimal basin development. 102

123 Annex A Forum Booklet FORUM OBJECTIVES Under the overall theme of Moving towards optimal development of the Mekong River Basin the objectives of the Forum are: 1. To review the implementation of the current Basin Development Strategy: How do stakeholder perceptions of ongoing basin development compare with MRC reviews of the implementation of the Strategy? How can mutual understanding be increased? In what areas can implementation improve? 2. To discuss the assessment of development trends, needs, opportunities and challenges in the Mekong basin in the medium and long term: What are the needs, opportunities and challenges in the future in the context of providing basin-wide energy, food and flood security against climate change? How can the benefits from basin development be increased while minimising adverse impacts? 3. To provide broad feedback and input to the updating of the Basin Development Strategy: Will the proposed updated strategic priorities and actions lead to increased levels of cooperation in sustainable river development and management? What should be the role of the MRC, national agencies and broader stakeholders (other regional initiatives, private sectors, and civil society) in the implementation of these priorities and actions? ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES 1. Shared knowledge and understanding increased of how the basin s water and related resources can be developed and managed considering plausible long-term needs, opportunities and risks. 2. Inputs gained from the assembled stakeholders on the implementation and updating of the Basin Development Strategy, including key messages to be considered by Government representatives during their discussion and negotiation of the updated BDS (for ). 3. Views documented in the publication of the Forum s proceedings. 103

124 Annex A Forum Booklet THE FORMAT OF THE FORUM The Forum will be hosted by the Mekong River Commission (MRC) and conducted in an open fashion. The Forum will be interactive and structured around dialogues, using presentations to catalyse discussions. There will be five sessions within the first two days. On the third day an interesting field trip will take place. After a short opening session, the Forum will continue with a plenary setting the scene session, which will flow into three parallel topic sessions that will dig deeper into strategic basin development issues. The results of the parallel sessions will be discussed in a plenary session. Towards the end of day 2, the key messages from the Forum will be discussed and formulated. The event will end with a short closing session. Session 1: Opening of Forum After the welcome address by the Cambodian Minister of the MRC Council, there will be a short recapitulation of the main events that have taken place since the last basin planning forum in 2010 by the CEO of the MRCS. Thereafter, participants will have the opportunity to voice their views of the MRC basin development planning process and the Forum itself in an open dialogue with senior officials from the MRC Member Countries. The session will end with the presentation of the Forum s objectives and how they are planned to be achieved. Session 2: Getting engaged (Plenary) This plenary session will provide information related to the ongoing implementation of the Basin Development Strategy and the longer-term development needs and opportunities and associated risks. The plenary session will prepare everyone for the more in-depth discussion of strategic topics during the subsequent parallel sessions. There will be room after each presentation for raising questions and providing opinions. The topics that will be presented and discussed are: Implementation and impact of the current Basin Development Strategy. The Forum will take stock of progress and achievements of implementing the Strategy, including bringing regional and national planning closer together. Development trends and long-term outlook for the Mekong basin. The Forum 104

125 Annex A Forum Booklet will discuss the MRC assessment of how the Mekong basin might look in the long term, say It will review and further identify the main needs that should be factored into national development planning in the MRC sectors (irrigation, hydropower, navigation, flood control, fisheries, tourism, etc.). The Forum will also identify some major challenges and risks that may affect the ability to meet those needs and opportunities, such as shocks. Updating the Basin Development Strategy. The Forum will discuss the updated BDS for , which have been formulated in earlier meetings with regional and national stakeholders. Session 3: Focused dialogue (three parallel sessions) Parallel Session 3a: Results from Implementation of the current Basin Development Strategy The current Development Opportunity Space (DOS) in the Basin Development Strategy includes development opportunities in hydropower (some mainstream and tributary), irrigation, fisheries, navigation, flood and drought management, watershed management, tourism, etc. The Strategy then stipulates strategic priorities related to capturing these opportunities whilst minimising transboundary adverse impacts. The session will discuss: How Mekong countries are implementing the Strategy through development in sectors such as irrigation and hydropower, and how MRC procedures, guidelines, and guidance are being beneficially used; How cooperation with China is being advanced to potentially capture the benefits from upstream development and address risks; How regional perspectives are being integrated into national planning and vice versa; and How key knowledge gaps on key issues such as sediments, fisheries and floodplain management are being addressed. After each presentation there will be ample time for Q&A and interaction with a panel of MRC and external experts. Parallel Session 3b: Assessment of benefit sharing options A strategic priority in the current agreed Basin Development Strategy ( ) is to seek options for sharing the potential benefits and risks of development. This Session will start with an overview of the international experience in benefit sharing, followed by a dialogue on their relevance for the Mekong. Some concrete examples of benefit sharing from development projects in the Mekong region will be presented. 105

126 Annex A Forum Booklet In a follow-on session, the MRCS will present its recent review of the cumulative assessment of the countries water resources development plans, with and without climate change. The assessment results indicate that the economic benefits of existing and planned water resources development are large. But they also indicate that the benefits, impacts and risks might not be distributed equitably. Ongoing work to further reduce key knowledge gaps and formulate further assessments will also be presented from the work of the Council Study. Then, emerging long-term exploratory scenarios will be discussed that will investigate future development needs within the basin in response to climate change, demographic changes, rising social demands and expectations for livelihoods and flood, food and energy security. The assessment results could help the basin countries to identify where the trade-offs and opportunities lie in further basin development. Lastly, a presentation will demonstrate that at the regional scale, benefit sharing is guided by the 1995 Mekong Agreement through: (i) the obligation to make every effort to avoid, minimise and mitigate harmful effects of water projects and (ii) the optimisation of development and promotion of interdependent sub-regional growth and cooperation through joint and national projects of basin-wide significance. The presentation and subsequent discussion will shed light on how these mechanisms are being implemented through a range of national and transboundary planning, decision-making and governance processes, including through scenario work. Parallel Session 3c: Updating the Basin Development Strategy Building on the earlier plenary session, this session will discuss each of the emerging medium-term strategic priorities for basin development and management together with their five-year MRC strategic actions ( ). To stimulate discussion among the participants, two well-known Mekong followers will present their critical reviews of the BDS. There will be a facilitated dialogue on how the implementation of the strategic priorities and actions can be further improved. Relevant issues include: what will be the role of the MRC, national agencies and that of broader stakeholders in the implementation of the strategic actions; how can impacts be measured; how can the National Indicative Plans best be used to bring actions in the national planning frameworks and subsequently monitored? 106

127 Annex A Forum Booklet Session 4: Synthesis of dialogues and formulation of key messages (Plenary) The facilitators of the parallel sessions will report back to the plenary. There will be ample time for raising further comments and questions by the participants that were unable to participate in a particular session. After a break, the results of various topics discussed during the two days of the conference will be synthesised, keeping the objectives of the Forum in mind. Subsequently, the key messages from the Forum will be identified and drafted with support from the Forum and session facilitators. Participants will have the opportunity to react to the evolving key messages. Session 5: Closing of Forum The CEO of the MRC Secretariat and the Chair of the MRC Joint Committee will close the Forum. LANGUAGE The meeting will be conducted in English. Simultaneous translation from English into Khmer, Lao, Thai and Vietnamese will be provided in the plenary sessions only. EXHIBITION The MRCS is organising a photo exhibition on the changing face of the Mekong region about the current development in the basin and allow participants to be appreciative or critical of these changes in their own ways. MRCS programmes will also distribute relevant publications and brochures. Other organizations, including private developers, branch organisations and regional and national organisations and projects, will present their relevant work in the available information booths. TRANSPORTATION There will be welcome booth at both international and domestic terminal at Siem Reap airport. Please identify yourself at the welcome booth so that we can put you in our arranged van to send you to your hotel. Normally the hotel in Siem Reap will offer one way free transfer to/from Airport, please use this free service for your departure from Siem Reap. We will not arrange airport transfer on your departure day. There will be transfer between the designated hotels and venue which are: Route 1 From Angkor Pearl hotel, Banyan Leaf hotel, and Parklane hotel Route 2 From Prum Bayon hotel and Majestic Angkor hotel 107

128 Annex A Forum Booklet Van and/or bus will leave at 7:45 am of each forum day, and will leave at 7:30 am on the field trip day. If you stay at other hotels, you may come to catch the van/bus to the venue at those two designated points or responsible to travel to the venue yourself. CONTACTS During the forum days if you need any assistance or general information, you can contact either of the two persons below: Ms. Praivan Limbanboon (Maew) Basin Development Plan Programme (BDP) Mekong River Commission Secretariat (MRCS) Tel (12) praivan@mrcmekong.org Ms. Mak Somean Cambodian National Mekong Committee Secretariat (CNMC) Tel (12) someanm@hotmail.com 108

129 Annex A Forum Booklet Forum Agenda The 4 th Regional Stakeholder Forum on the Mekong IWRM-based Basin Development Strategy Moving towards optimal development of the Mekong River Basin November 2014, Siem Reap, Cambodia 08:00 08:30 Registration Opening Session and Introduction Forum Facilitator: Dr. Sokhem Pech DAY 1 20 NOVEMBER :30 09:15 Welcome Remarks H.E. Mr. Lim Kean Hor, Minister of Water Resources and Meteorology, Chair of Cambodia National Mekong Committee and MRC Council Member Remarks on significant events since the last Forum Mr. Hans Guttman, Chief Executive Officer, MRCS Perspective on significant development events in the Mekong basin since the 3 rd MRC/BDP Regional Stakeholder Forum in June Preview of Exhibitions Coffee break The MRC and water resources development The session will allow participants to air their views and interact with a panel of senior officials from the four countries on the role of the MRC in promoting development opportunities and addressing challenges in the Mekong region. MRC Senior Panel: *H.E. Te Navuth, Secretary-General, Cambodia National Mekong Committee Secretariat; *Dr. Daovong Phonekeo, Director General, Lao Department of Energy Policy & Planning; *Mr. Boonjong Jarusdumrongnit, Deputy Director-General, Thai Department of Water Resources; *Mr. Cuong Tran Duc, Deputy Director-General, Vietnam National Mekong Committee Secretariat; and *Mr. Hans Guttman *Special guest: Ms. Qiuchi Shi, Deputy Director-General, Department of Water Resources, China 10:30 10:45 Forum Objectives and Structure Forum facilitator: Dr. Sokhem Pech 109

130 Annex A Forum Booklet Session 2: Getting engaged Objective: - To share information and views on ongoing Mekong basin development planning; and - To prepare for the more in-depth discussions in the parallel sessions. 10: Impact of the current Basin Development Strategy Presenter: Dr. Anoulak Kittikhoun, BDP (Regional) Coordinator, MRCS 11:05 11:20 Clarifying Questions and answers 11:20 11:40 Assessment of development trends and long-term outlook for the Mekong Presenter: Mr. Ton Lennaerts, BDP International Technical Advisor, MRCS 11:40 12:00 Clarifying Questions and answers Tour of Exhibitions, including Photo Exhibition the Changing Mekong River Lunch Development of water resources in the Lancang (Upper Mekong) river Basin Presenter: Ms. Qiuchi Shi, Deputy Director-General, Department of Water Resources, China Clarifying Questions and answers 14:20 14:35 The updated Basin Development Strategy for Presenter: Dr. Naruepon Sukumasavin, Director of Planning, MRCS 14:35 15:00 Clarifying questions and answers to Panel: Dr. Naruepon, Dr. Anoulak and Mr. Ton 15:00 15:30 Coffee break Parallel Sessions 3: Critical dialogues on key aspects of basin development planning - Parallel Session 3a: Results from implementation of the Basin Development Strategy Objective: To discuss the implementation of the current Basin Development Strategy by member countries and other actors in the Mekong basin. Insights will contribute to implementing the Strategy for the Parallel Session 3b: Assessment of benefit sharing options Objective: To discuss the international and Mekong experience in benefit sharing. To discuss the limitations of the existing cumulative assessment of national plans and contribute to new development scenarios aimed at optimal development and regional benefit sharing in the Mekong basin. - Parallel Session 3c: Updating of the Basin Development Strategy for Objective: to discuss the emerging strategic priorities and actions for Mekong basin development and management and contribute to their improvement. Parallel Session 3a: Implementation of the Basin Development Strategy Parallel Session 3b: Assessment of benefit sharing options Parallel Session 3c: Updating of the Basin Development Strategy 15:30 15:40 Session 3a facilitator: Dr. Matthew McCartney, Head of IWMI Southeast Asia Office Session 3b facilitator: Mr. Henrik Larsen Session 3c facilitator: Ms. Klomjit Chandrapanya 110

131 Annex A Forum Booklet 15:40 16:20 Cambodia: Expanding irrigated agriculture in the floodplains Presenter: H.E. Ponh Sachack, Director General, Technical Affairs, Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology, Cambodia Lao PDR: Realizing hydropower development opportunities in the Basin Development Strategy Presenter: Dr. Daovong Phonekeo, Director General, Energy Policy and Planning, Ministry of Energy and Mines, Lao PDR 16:20 17:15 Questions and answers Panel with presenters and: - Mr. Kanchadin Srapratoom, Chief of Loan Project Branch, Foreign Financed Project Division, Royal Irrigation Department, Thailand - Dr. Mak Soeun, Deputy Director General, General Directorate of Agriculture, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Cambodia - Mr. Malcolm Wallace, senior expert, MRCS 17:15 17:30 Summary of Day 1 and outlook to Day 2 Session 3a facilitator: Dr. Matthew McCartney 17:30 Closing of Day 1 19:00 21:00 Reception & Dinner Benefit sharing on international rivers: principles and lessons from experience Presenter: Prof. David Grey, University of Oxford Questions and answers Panel with presenters and: - Mr. Wiboon Pongtepupathum, Director, Project for Hydropower at Irrigation Dams, Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) - Mr. Alfred Nakatsuma, Regional Director, USAID - Therese Sjömander Magnusson, Director, Transboundary Water Management, Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI) Summary of Day 1 and outlook to Day 2 Session 3b facilitator: Mr. Henrik Larsen GMS Regional Investment Framework and the updated Basin Development Strategy Presenter: Raza Farrukh, Asian Development Bank HQ Strengthening ASEAN- MRC cooperation Presenter: Wan Joon Lian, Head of Initiative for ASEAN Integration Division, ASEAN Secretariat The IFC, the private sector and the updated Basin Development Strategy Presenter: Kate Lazarus, International Finance Corporation Questions and answers Panel with presenters and: Additional perspectives from research institutes and NGOs Chayanis Krittasudthach eewa, Deputy Director, Stockholm Environment Institute Asia Center Summary of Day 1 and outlook to Day 2 Session 3c facilitator: Ms. Klomjit Chandrapanya 111

132 Annex A Forum Booklet DAY 2 21 NOVEMBER :30 08:45 Opening of Day 2 with results of Day 1 and expectations for Day 2 Forum facilitator: Dr. Sokhem Pech Continuation of Parallel Sessions from Day 1: Critical dialogues on key aspects of basin development planning Parallel Session 3a: Implementation of the Basin Development Strategy 08:45 8:55 Introduction to Session continuation Session 3a facilitator: Dr. Matthew McCartney 08:55 9:40 Thailand: Implementing water resources management strategies in Mekong sub-basins Presenter: Mr. Nipon Mulmuangsean, Member of 3T River Basin Committee, Thailand Integrating regional perspectives into national and subnational planning Vietnam Presenter: Dr. Le Thi Kim Dzung, former Deputy Director, Development Strategy Institute, Ministry for Planning and Investment Cambodia Presenter: Dr. Mak Solieng, CNMCS 09:45 10:15 Questions and answers Panel with presenters and: - H.E. Mr. Tharak, Secretary of State, Ministry of Planning, Cambodia - Ms. Sirivanh Khonethapane, Assistant Minister, Ministry of Planning and Investment, Lao PDR 10:15 10:45 Coffee break Parallel Session 3b: Assessment of benefit sharing options: towards optimal basin development Introduction to Session continuation Session 3b facilitator: Mr. Henrik Larsen Cumulative impact assessment of the national water resources development plans of the Mekong counties Presenter: Dr. Thanapon Piman, MRCS The Study on the Sustainable Development and Management of the Mekong River Presenter: Dr. Henry Manguerra, Coordinator, Council Study, MRCS Questions and answers Panel with presenters and: - Prof. Chaiyuth Sukhsri, Advisor, Thai NMCS - H.E. Watt Botkosal, Deputy SG, Cambodia National Mekong Committee Secretariat - Mr. Voradeth Phonekeo, Coordinator, Initiative for Sustainable Hydropower, MRCS Parallel Session 3c: Updating of the Basin Development Strategy Introduction to session continuation Session 3c facilitator: Ms. Klomjit Chandrapanya The updated Basin Development Strategy: the MRC view on priorities, implementation and impact monitoring Presenter: Dr. Anoulak Kittikhoun and Dr. Vitoon Viriyasakultorn, MRCS Critical reviews of the draft updated Basin Development Strategy Reviewer 1: Dr. John Dore, Senior advisor, Australian DFAT Reviewer 2: Prof. David Grey, Oxford University Clarifying Questions and answers 112

133 Annex A Forum Booklet 10:45 11:15 Knowledge gaps on sediments and fisheries: science or advocacy? Presenter: Dr. Rinus Vis, Senior expert & Manager of Sustainable Use of Water and Soil Team, Deltares Making the basin-wide fisheries management and development strategy Presenter: Dr. Sam Nuov, Chair, Fisheries Technical Advisory Body (TAB) 11:15 12:00 Discussion Panel with presenters and: - Marc Goichot, Lead Sustainable Hydropower and River Basin Management, WWF - Alan Brooks, Director, World Fish Centre - Mr. Sommano Phounsavath, Director, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Lao PDR 12:00 12:15 Summary of key messages Session 3a facilitator: Dr. Matthew McCartney 12:15 14:00 Lunch Formulation of long-term exploratory scenarios to investigate how regional benefits can be increased Presenter: BDP Scenario Assessment Team Approach to regional benefit sharing in the Mekong region Presenter: Mr. Ton Lennaerts, MRCS Discussion Panel with presenters and: - Dr. Eric Kemp-Benedict, Director, Stockholm Environment Institute - Dr. Huong Thuy Phan Nguyen, Coordinator, CCAI, MRCS - Dr. Rathana Peou, South East Asia Regional Scenarios Coordinator, CGIAR Summary of key messages Session 3b facilitator: Mr. Henrik Larsen Suggestions for improving the updated BDS strategic priorities and actions Q&A with audience and panel: - Mr. Russell James, Executive Director, Murray-Darling Basin Authority - Mr. Hong Toan Nguyen, National Advisor for Vietnam - Mr. Buree Suwanarat, National planning specialist, Thai National Mekong Committee Secretariat Discussion (Q&A continued) Summary of key messages Session 3c facilitator: Ms. Klomjit Chandrapanya Plenary Session 4: Synthesis of dialogues and formulation of key messages Objective: - To present and discuss findings of the parallel sessions - To develop the key Forum messages Session 4 facilitators: Dr. Anoulak Kittikhoun and Prof. David Grey 14:00 14:15 Report from parallel session 3a Session 3a facilitator: Dr. Matthew McCartney 14:15 14:30 Questions and answers Session 3a facilitator: Dr. Matthew McCartney and session participants 14:30 14:45 Report from parallel session 3b Session 3b facilitator: Mr. Henrik Larsen 14:45 15:00 Questions and answers 113

134 Annex A Forum Booklet Session 3b facilitator: Mr. Henrik and session participants 15:00 15:15 Report from parallel session 3c Session 3c facilitator: Ms. Klomjit Chandrapanya 15:15 15:30 Questions and answers Session 3c facilitator: Ms. Klomjit Chandrapanya and session participants 15:30 16:00 Coffee break 16:00 17:15 Synthesis and development of key Forum messages Session 4 facilitators: Dr. Anoulak Kittikhoun and Prof. David Grey Closing Session Forum facilitator: Dr. Sokhem Pech 17:15 17:30 Summary of the Forum and next steps 17:30 17:45 Closing Remarks Dr. Anoulak Kittikhoun, BDP Coordinator Mr. Hans Guttman, CEO, MRCS H.E. Mr. Te Navuth, Secretary General of Cambodia National Mekong Committee Secretariat, Chair of MRC Joint Committee for 2014 DAY 3 22 NOVEMBER :00 13:00 Field trip to: (1) the hydraulic city of Angkor Wat, the capital of the Khmer Empire in Cambodia (2) Kampong Phlouk Village 114

135 Annex A Forum Booklet FORUM HOSTS CAMBODIA NATIONAL MEKONG COMMITTEE H.E. Mr. Lim Kean Hor Minister for Water Resources and Meteorology of Cambodia Chairman of Cambodia National Mekong Committee MRC Council Member for Cambodia Chairman of Tonle Sap Authority His Excellency Lim Kean Hor has been Minister for Water Resources and Meteorology since 1999 and has been reappointed for the 4th consecutive round of the government water portfolio ( ) as Minister for Water Resources and Meteorology. He has been awarded the Medal Chea Topakar the highest government Medal of National Merit Class. Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology is mandated for the management and coordination of water and waterrelated resources in the country, including water resources management policy and strategy development, irrigation infrastructures development, flood and drought management, as well as meteorological sectors management and development. In the past career development, His Excellency Minister had been appointed by the Royal Government of Cambodia to undertake various positions and responsibilities in the water resources management, irrigation, meteorology and agricultural sectors with various positions ranging from Director General of the General Directorate of Irrigation, Hydrology and Meteorology, Under-State Secretary of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Vice- Chairman of Cambodia National Mekong Committee and the Adviser to the Prime Minister. Cambodia National Mekong Committee is responsible for coordinating the management, preservation, conservation and sustainable development of Mekong River Basin water and related resources in Cambodia and with the Mekong River Commission member countries for mutual benefit and people s well-being. Tonle Sap Authority is mandated for coordinating the management, conservation and development of the Tonle Sap river basin aiming at addressing the emerging challenges and ensuring the sustainable management and development of the Tonle Sap Basin. 115

136 Annex A Forum Booklet H.E. Mr Te Navuth Secretary General Cambodia National Mekong Committee (CNMC) Secretariat MRC Joint Committee Member for Cambodia Chairman of MRC Joint Committee for His Excellency Te Navuth assumed a duty as Secretary General with CNMC since 2011 and has played significant role as MRC Joint Committee Member for Cambodia. Previously, he managed the Technical Support Division of the Mekong River Commission Secretariat for six years ( ) after working over 10 years for the Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology as Technical Staff and then Director of Hydrology and River Works Department. Excellency Navuth has a Master of Science in Land Hydrology (Former Soviet Union) and a Master of Business Administration (Phnom Penh) and has significant working experiences in groundwater resources, hydrometeorological network management, hydrological information management system, water resources management, flood management and mitigation and flood control planning, project/programme planning and execution, human resources and financial management. MEKONG RIVER COMMISSION SECRETARIAT Mr. Hans Guttman Chief Executive Officer, MRC Secretariat Hans Guttman has spent most of his professional career in Southeast Asia. Undergraduate in Marine Biology/Geography from James Cook University in Australia, and a MSc from Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Thailand. His career has begun in 1992 with AIT Aqua Outreach Programme promoting aquatic resources management and rural development. In 2001 he joined the MRC Environment Programme as Coordinator. In 2007 Hans was Coordinator for the Wetlands Alliance, a network of some 30 agencies working on rural poverty in Cambodia, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam. Since November 2011 he has been CEO for MRC Secretariat. 116

137 Annex A Forum Booklet FORUM FACILITATORS Dr. Pech Sokhem Dr Sokhem has over 30 years of experience working at a senior management level with national governments, intergovernmental organizations, international multi-disciplinary research consortia and consulting companies both in Mekong Region, Asia and North America. His expertise and experience include: law and regulations; institutional and organizational development; regional policy formulation and hydro-diplomacy; multi-stakeholder communication/ dialogue and consultation; strategic assessment; dispute management; and knowledge management. Sokhem understands the way government, private sector, funding institutions and civil society organizations work. Sokhem was formerly a senior official in Cambodia s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He subsequently joined the Mekong River Commission (MRC) as a lawyer before being appointed as Director of the MRC s Technical Support Division. After five years with MRC he joined an academic research program in Japan focusing on water policy in the Mekong Region; and has also served as Chair of the Regional Research network, implementing the Mekong Program on Environment Water and Resilience. Sokhem now leads a consultancy firm based in Vancouver. He is the BDP senior advisor to CNMCS. Parallel Session 3A Facilitator: Implementation of the Basin Development Strategy Dr. Matthew McCartney International Water Management Institute (IWMI) Matthew McCartney is a principal researcher at the International Water Management Institute (IWMI), specializing in water resources and wetland and hydro-ecological studies. He is IWMIs head of office in Vientiane, Lao PDR. His experience stems from participation in a wide range of research and applied projects often as part of a multi-disciplinary team. He sits on the Science and Technical Review Panel of the Ramsar wetland convention. 117

138 Annex A Forum Booklet Session Parallel 3B Facilitator: Assessment of benefit sharing Mr. Henrik Larsen International Technical Advisor, Environment Programme, Mekong River Commission Secretariat Henrik Larsen is a specialist in environmental and water resources management and holds a position as International Technical Advisor with the Environment Programme at the Mekong River Commission Secretariat. By training he is an environmental engineer with 25 years of combined experience in environmental and water resources management, monitoring, modelling and assessment activities, environmental impact studies, and climate change adaptation assessment. He has worked as consultant and advisor in more than 20 countries around the world. Session Parallel 3C Facilitator: Updating of the Basin Development Strategy Ms. Klomjit Chandrapanya After an earlier career in journalism (environment, foreign affairs) and many years away from the Mekong region working on communications for UN agencies and international NGOs, Klomjit spent the last five years, first with MRC as Chief of International Cooperation and Communications and then with USAID, focusing on international water cooperation strategies, policies and engaging key stakeholders. She was born in Thailand and graduated from Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies with a degree in Southeast Asia studies and economic development. 118

139 Annex A Forum Booklet OPENING SESSION: MRC SENIOR PANEL H.E. Mr. Te Navuth Secretary General, CNMCS (see bio above) Dr. Daovong Phonekeo Director General, Lao Department of Energy Policy & Planning Dr. Daovong is responsible for the policy and planning of the energy sector since He previously led the hydropower development and planning programme under the former Department of Electricity from at the Ministry of Energy. Post-graduated from Germany in the field of power transmission system at the Technical University of Ilmenau in 1990, he has 15 years of experiences in power transmission and electrification projects during his employment with Electricité du Laos (EDL) from He currently also holds several important positions e.g. as Lao PDR Senior Official Meeting Leader on Energy for ASEAN, as Member of the GMS Regional Power Trade Coordination Committee, as Board Member of the EDL Shareholder Meeting, and as Alternate Member of the MRC Joint Committee for Lao PDR. Mr. Boonjong Jarusdumrongnit Deputy Director General, Department of Water Resources Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of Thailand Mr.Boonjong Jarusdumrongnit is a senior management level of Royal Thai Government. He has experience on organization management, project planning and government budget management. His former position was a Director of Water Crisis Prevention Centre and Director of Bureau of Water Resources Policy and Planning. He specializes in water resources management and environmental impact assessment. He was member of the Senate Sub-committee on flood mitigation and water resources management in the Mekong Basin of Thailand. 119

140 Annex A Forum Booklet Mr. Cuong Tran Duc Deputy Director-General, Vietnam National Mekong Committee Secretariat Mr. Cuong is the Deputy Director General of the Viet Nam National Mekong Committee Secretariat and was the Director to Operation Division (Phnom Penh, ), Technical Support Division (Phnom Penh, ) and Environment Division (Vientiane, ) at the Mekong River Commission Secretariat. He has a Bachelor of Science in Agriculture (Hanoi Agricultural University, Viet Nam) and Master of Engineering in Agriculture (Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok, Thailand). Mr. Hans Guttman CEO, MRCS (see bio above) 120

141 Annex A Forum Booklet PLENARY SESSION 2 PRESENTERS The Impact of the Mekong Basin Development Strategy Dr. Anoulak Kittikhoun Programme Coordinator, Basin Development Plan, Mekong River Commission Secretariat Dr. Anoulak Kittikhoun leads the MRC Secretariat s support to the Member Countries cooperation in Mekong basin development planning. He previously worked for 10 years at the United Nations Headquarters and related organizations in New York, including the Department of Economic and Social Affairs and the Department of Political Affairs, and was an adjunct professor for 5 years at Brooklyn College of New York. Educated in Laos, Australia (Australian National University, where he was international Valedictorian) and the United States (CUNY Graduate Center, where his publication won the American Sociological Association s Reinhard Bendix Award for Best Article), he is a political scientist by training and a diplomacy, development, planning and conflict management expert by practice. Abstract The first IWRM-based Mekong Basin Development Strategy, approved by the MRC Council of ministers on 26 January 2011, was an important milestone for the cooperation of MRC Member Countries. It demonstrated for the first time the shared understandings of the opportunities and risks inherent in the national plans for water resources development in Lower Mekong Basin. These understandings aligned fully with the Declaration of the First MRC Summit of Heads of Governments held on 5 April 2010 in Hua Hin. Both the Strategy and Declaration acknowledged that accelerating the development of water and related resources would make a significant contribution to the socio-economic development of the region, but recognized the need to address any negative impacts on the basin s environment and peoples that may occur. In this context, the Basin Development Strategy sets out 15 Strategic Priorities and 62 Strategic Actions to support the countries in capturing development opportunities and minimize transboundary impacts. It is being implemented through the Basin Action Plan, comprising a Regional Action Plan and four National Indicative Plans, with 70% of regional activities and over 40% of national projects substantially addressed. Implementation has resulted in a greater awareness and knowledge of development issues and increased appreciation of the benefits to be derived from cooperation. Transparency and data and information exchanges between national and regional actors are increasing. Studies and surveys are 121

142 Annex A Forum Booklet reducing knowledge gaps for basin development planning and decision making. Considerable progress has been made on understanding sediment issues. Investments have been leveraged for development projects and technical assistance. Last, but not least, the MRC has adopted a major reform initiative to streamline its strategic planning and organizational structure. The Forum will take stock of progress and achievements of implementing the Strategy and discuss how implementation can be further improved, including bringing regional and national planning closer together. Assessment of development trends and long-term outlook for the Mekong Mr. Ton Lennaerts International Technical Advisor, Basin Development Plan, Mekong River Commission Secretariat Mr. Ton Lennaerts is an international advisor to MRC s Basin Development Plan Programme. He oversaw MRC s cumulative assessment of national water resources development plans and the subsequent formulation of MRC s first IWRM-based Basin Development Strategy. Currently, he supports the implementation of the Strategy, the exploration of more optimal development scenarios, the scoping of regional benefit sharing opportunities, and the Council Study. He previously worked for the World Bank and PA Consulting. He has over 30 years of experience in planning and management of (international) river basins, involving and technically leading participatory approaches, multi-sector assessments, scenario development, capacity building, preparation of policies and plans, project identification and preparation in various countries in Europe, Central Asia, Caucasus, Middle East, Africa, and Southeast Asia. Abstract The needs, opportunities and risks of water resources development and management in the Lower Mekong Basin (LMB) will be shaped by the changing socio-economic status of the countries as they move towards middle and high-income countries. The presentation begins with a longer term economic, social and environmental outlook of the Mekong basin. It then assesses how well the current national water resources plans align with the long-term outlook. Although the basin-wide cumulative assessment shows that the national plans would create large benefits, the plans fall short in protecting key environmental assets and protecting millions of increasingly affluent people against extreme floods. The assessment results also demonstrate the considerable synergies as well as trade-offs that exist in the Mekong Basin between flood, energy, food, environment and climate security. In the context of the long-term outlook, a major trade-off is balancing the development of the large Cambodian floodplains for urbanization and global food 122

143 Annex A Forum Booklet security, on the one hand, and the preservation of (part of) these floodplains for flood storage, fisheries and environmental protection, on the other. The measures needed to adapt to climate change will likely also create a few major trade-offs at the basin-scale level. These transboundary and basin-wide trade-offs are currently being examined by MRC Programmes through the formulation and assessment of basin-wide exploratory scenarios. The results may show where opportunities lie in the future to optimize basin development and provide water-related security in an equitable manner through cooperation, as envisioned in the 1995 Mekong Agreement. adapt national water resources development plans accordingly. It is anticipated that regional benefit sharing, including the development of joint projects, will likely play a role in making these choices and converging national plans. The development of such projects, and the sharing of their benefits, will lead inevitably to higher levels of transboundary cooperation, benefiting many sectors (food, energy, navigation, tourism, flood protection) in the Mekong Basin, similar to that which has occurred in mode developed river basins in the western world. The insights gained should allow the member countries to make the (difficult) choices and Development of water resources in the Lancang (Upper Mekong) River Basin Ms. Qiuchi Shi Deputy Director-General, Department of Water Resources, China Ms. Qiuchi Shi, the Deputy Director-General of Department of Water Resources of MWR, held her master of Environmental Science and Technology in the Institute of Infrastructure, Hydraulic and Environment (IHE) in She has involved in National Water Law drafting and revision, participated in national planning on water resources protection, Organized water allocation in Xinjiang, been in Charge of water management and soil and water conservation in Xinjiang. 123

144 Annex A Forum Booklet The updated Mekong Basin Development Strategy for Dr. Naruepon Sukumasavin Director, Planning Division, Mekong River Commission Secretariat, Vientiane Abstract Dr. Naruepon completed his PhD at Japan's Tohoku University. His fields of expertise are fisheries resource management, population genetics and biodiversity conservation. He joined the Office of the Secretariat as director in charge of the Operations Division in March 2014 from the Thai Department of Fisheries where he had been working for more than 30 years. Since July, he has led the Planning Division of the MRC Secretariat to support the Member Countries cooperation in Mekong Basin Development Plan, Initiative Sustainable Hydropower and Mekong-Integrated Water Resources Management. Building on the achievements and lessons from its implementation, the Basin Development Strategy approved in 2011 is undergoing an updating process by the MRC, in consultation with counterparts at the national and regional levels. In line with the Declaration of the 2 nd MRC Summit by the Prime Ministers held on 5 April 2014, the Strategy is being updated to move basin development towards more sustainable outcomes. The current Strategy is based on a cumulative assessment of the existing national water resources development plans of the Mekong basin countries. Under these plans, for instance, major environmental assets in the Mekong basin are currently not protected. Similarly, little protection against extreme floods is in place for the densely populated Mekong delta. Moreover, the benefits from basin development may not be viewed as equitably distributed. These plans could be optimized from a longer-term and basin-wide perspective, with a view to increasing national benefits and minimizing adverse transboundary impacts. The updated Strategy (currently in draft) is setting out revised strategic priorities for the medium term for MRC and relevant actors in the Basin. For the next five years, it prescribes actions that should be taken by the MRC working with counterparts at the regional and national levels to strengthen regional cooperation, improve national water and related resources development planning and projects, address the remaining key knowledge gaps, and strengthen basin management procedures and processes, information systems and tools and basin-wide impact monitoring and evaluation. 124

145 Annex A Forum Booklet PARALLEL SESSION 3A: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BASIN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY PRESENTERS Expanding irrigated agriculture in the floodplains of Cambodia H.E. Mr. Ponh Sachak Director General of the Technical Affairs Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology, Cambodia H.E. Mr. Ponh Sachak has been working for the Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology since As Director General of the Technical Affairs, H.E. Mr. Sachak manages Rural Development and Irrigation Rehabilitation and Construction Projects and technical affairs of Departments of Hydrology and River Works, Irrigated Agriculture, Meteorology, Famer Water User Community, Engineering, Water Supply and Sanitation and Water Management and Conservation. H.E. Mr. Sachak previously worked as Irrigation Engineer for the UNDP-ILO for four years and was Co-Manager of EU-PRASAC for eight years. Abstract: Agriculture remains to be important sector for the national economy (31% of total GDP) and main income generating activities for 70% rural people in Cambodia. Continued development in agriculture sector remains an important Government's strategy to reduce poverty in rural communities, achieve food security, and foster equitable and sustainable social development. To respond to the government s strategy mentioned above, there is need to expand irrigated agriculture and ensuring water security for irrigation is the mandate of MOWRAM. Despite abundant water resources, Cambodia often faces flood and drought incidences and the majority of farming activities, particularly rice still depends on rainfall. Irrigation development and management in Cambodia encounters many issues: First of all, Cambodia is a pan-form landscape where generally the 125

146 Annex A Forum Booklet Mekong mainstream is located in the parts of lower elevation and the majority of farming areas are located far from the Mekong mainstream and at the higher elevation Cambodia is still far from reaching the development potential for irrigation due to lack of water management infrastructure, effective planning, erratic rainfall regime and lack of significant water storage location. The majority of existing irrigation schemes was developed during the Pol Pot Regime with little consideration on the hydrological and watershed management and many of them were not functioned, easily eroded and destroyed. There have not been opportunities for perfect scientific and technical application and implementation of irrigation development due to land properties and the absence of adequate land use planning and management, and the lack of fund. However, the opportunities for expanding irrigated agriculture exists since there is large cultivated area with only one season crop, still little irrigated agriculture development and estimated use of available water resources by agriculture will total around 9,330 MCM a year in 2015 and projected to be around 10,380 MCM by Lao PDR - Realizing hydropower development opportunity in the Basin Development Strategy Dr. Daovong Phonekeo Director General, Energy Policy and Planning, Ministry of Energy and Mines, Lao PDR (see bio above) Abstract The Basin Development Strategy agreed by the four MRC member countries in 2011 provided further development opportunities in water and related sectors including tributary and some mainstream hydropower development. The Strategy was underpinned by MRC BDP assessment of basin-wide development scenarios involving international and national experts and participatory approach including dialogues with broader stakeholders at past BDP Forums. The least developed and poorest of the Mekong countries, the Lao PDR has as a matter of national policy and priority to lift its people out of poverty and move the country forward through development of its rich natural resources. Sustainable hydropower development has already contributed to national economic development. At the same time, Lao PDR is committed to working with its neighbours and fellow MRC member countries in addressing their legitimate concerns about transboundary adverse impacts. Through basin planning process and the implementation of MRC procedures, Lao PDR expects to implement hydropower projects in a sustainable manner. 126

147 Annex A Forum Booklet PANEL MEMBERS FOR DISCUSSION Cambodia: Expanding irrigated agriculture in the floodplains Lao PDR: Realizing hydropower development opportunities in the Basin Development Strategy Dr. Mak Soeun Deputy Director General of the General Directorate of Agriculture (MAFF) Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Cambodia Dr Mak Soeun worked for the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Cambodia since 1989 and at present is Deputy Director General of the General Directorate of Agriculture. Dr Mak Soeun is Agronomist by education and has remarkable experience in Agricultural Research Development and Extension and policy and strategic plan formulation for agricultural sector. Since 2006, Dr Mak Soeun joint the BDP Phase One and Phase Two when he became Member of the National BDP-NIP Working Group and Steering Committee Member of Agriculture and Irrigated Programme of the MRC; and a numbers of ACIAR research projects as well as IWMI s Activities in Cambodia. Mr.Kanchadin Srapratoom Chief of Loan Project Branch, Foreign Financed Project Administration Division Royal Irrigation Department, Thailand Mr. Kanchadin Srapratoom has worked in Royal Irrigation Department (RID) since His job deals with ODA project formulation and management of RID both loan and grant projects as well as Technical Assistance project. He had been a part time lecturer of Faculty of Environment and Resources Studies on basic water resources development in rural area ( ), Mahidol University. 127

148 Annex A Forum Booklet Mr. Malcolm Wallace Senior expert and BDP Scenario Assessment Team member Mr. Malcolm Wallace is a consultant with over 40 years experience in the water resources sector, with wide experience of international river basin planning and institutions in Southeast Asia, Indo-China, South Asia, Africa, and the Middle East and held director level positions with Halcrow consulting firm. He has worked on many assignments with MRC since 2000, including as Team Leader for the development of the MRC s Decision Support Framework and as lead consultant of the BDP scenario assessment team in He is currently supporting the BDP with preparations for the exploratory scenarios. 128

149 Annex A Forum Booklet PARALLEL SESSION 3A: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BASIN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY (CONTINUED) PRESENTERS Implementing water resources management strategies in Mekong sub-basins Mr. Nipon Mulmuangsean Member of 3T River Basin Committee (RBC), Thailand Mr. Nipon Mulmuangsean is a farmer and activist in 3T sub-area. He is also member of 3T RBC and one who apply planning process from regional to sub-area level. He has participated in MRC programme/project activities for more than 10 years. At present, he is a team leader of M-IWRM Transboundary Project of Nam Kam (Thailand) working with Xe Bang Hieng Basin (Lao PDR). He used to work in Lao PDR for community conservation network funded by the World Bank and facilitator for USAID workshop in Thailand. Abstract The capacity building of RBC and Working Group (WG) is a high priority in Thailand and is in line with Basin Development Strategy strategic priority Mostly MRC activities in Thailand implementing in subarea are motivated and supported by RBC/WG. Department of Water Resources and related line agencies support on technical and work closely with RBC/WG. Nam Kam sub-basin is a pilot area to promote planning process since BDP Phase 1 and continues many activities linking to the other programmes/projects of MRC. M-IWRM Transboundary Project between Nam Kam (Thailand) and Xe Bang Hieng (Lao PDR) is a good example to formulate project implementation between two countries. At present, Fisheries programme support the study of mitigation route in Nam Kam and tributary and can be explored to other subbasins as basin wide issue. The project implementation is working closely between WG and fisheries government officers. At Nam Kam, the MRC activities serve stakeholder requirement and can be linked to local administration and government project. 129

150 Annex A Forum Booklet Integration of the Mekong Basin Development Strategy into national planning Dr. Dzun Le Thi Kim National Consultant, Viet Nam National Mekong Committee Secretariat, Ha Noi Dr. Dzung Le Thi Kim leads the Regional and Local Development Centre of the Vietnam-Laos-Cambodia Economic Development Cooperation Association in Viet Nam. She previously worked for 27 years at the Development Strategy Institute including the Planning Management Department under Ministry for Planning and Investment of Viet Nam. Educated as Dr. Economic Geography in the Former Soviet Union and Survey Integration for Development in the Netherlands, she was working as Regional Planner and Planning Manager, marine and coastal planner, took part in different researches within BDP in the 1 st phase, Development planning of Vietnam-Laos-Cambodia Triangle, socioeconomic planning of Lao PDR. Abstract The first IWRM-based Mekong Basin Development Strategy, approved by the MRC Council of ministers in January 2011 is affecting differently to the national development planning including socioeconomic and water-used sectors in Viet Nam Mekong Delta Region. It demonstrated for the first time the shared understandings of the need, opportunities and risks for integration of BDS into national planning. These understandings aligned fully with the legal planning framework in Vietnam context and the BDS planning procedures. Integration of BDS into national planning aims to update BDS itself to meet the varied conditions of the administrative regime countries and at the same time to link national prospect into the basin development strategy. The study (an ongoing Vietnam National Indicative Plan support project) has suggested the need of the consistency of information and data, the sectoral and territorial linkages in regional and national planning as well as the other likages related to water use. The integration procedures are recommended to maximize the use of BDS during national planning and BDS, in its order, to consider the national planning information while updating BDS. Integration of BDS into national planning is understood by two ways. Firstly, BDS provides the data and information on water use of the upper basin countries, the availability of water approaching the delta and technical support of MRC in resolving upper land issues related to the water flow by the seasons for countries to explore the basin information and data for development and planning scenarios on the water resource management base; and secondly, riparian countries contribute national development information including the water use of the projects while develop or update BDS. In the context of Mekong Delta three steps were recommended for BDS integration at different national planning phases. To realize the integration procedures suggested in the study it is recognized to improve national planning institution 130

151 Annex A Forum Booklet including the planning regulations and clear operational role definition for the sectoral ministries, local governors and particularly VNMC as most important national body related to the Mekong Basin matters. The integration procedure tested by the other member countries has to be institutionalized regionally by improving the basin planning cycle and conduction of adequate MRC Action plan. Implementing the Basin Development Strategy at National Level Dr Solieng Mak National Basin Development Plan Specialist Cambodia National Mekong Committee Secretariat Dr Solieng Mak provides technical support in Basin Development Plan to the National BDP Programme of the Cambodia National Mekong Committee, including the implementation of the Basin Development Strategy and National Indicative Plan. She has remarkable experience in IWRM-based Basin Development Planning with the Mekong River Commission at national and regional level; 10 years leading and researching experience in the Rice-based Farming System and Social-Ecology Research Programme with the Cambodia Agricultural Research and Development Institute; and has developed experience in independent consultant for 15 years with development partners, line ministries and nongovernment organisations in people-centred development, climate change, natural resources planning and monitoring. Abstract The Royal Government of Cambodia will continue to fully cooperate with other Mekong Member Countries under the MRC Framework to ensure the sustainable development of the Mekong River Basin. To implement the Prioritized Policies, RGC will continue to cooperate with other Mekong Member Countries in updating the IWRMbased Basin Development Strategy, MRC Strategic Plan, and effectively implementing the set activities under the MRC Framework and MRC decentralization plan as committed by the Heads of Government of Mekong Member Countries. Particularly, with existing functional mechanism of the national Basin Development Plan Working Groups, the implementation of the Basin Development Strategy will be through: 1. Integration into, and application of the basin development planning process, tools and guidelines in the national and sub-national planning, including national strategic development plan and water-sector development plans, in order to promote coordinated and basin-wide 131

152 Annex A Forum Booklet planning. This approach is being applied in the development of the Strategic Plan of the Tonle Sap Authority which is currently taking place. 2. Implementation of the National Indicative Plan (NIP) in which, basinwide sustainable development, stakeholder participation, and benefit sharing and transboundary cooperation are promoted. Example of this approach is the integration of the regional perspective into the National Strategic Development Plan ; and the incorporation of some first batch of the NIP projects into the National Rolling Plan for funding and implementation. 132

153 Annex A Forum Booklet PANEL MEMBERS FOR DISCUSSION Thailand: Implementing water resources management strategies in Mekong sub-basins Cambodia and Viet Nam: Integrating regional and sub-national planning H.E. Mr Tuon Thavrak Secretary of State Ministry of Planning, Cambodia Having been working for the Ministry of Planning since 1988 and holding different positions at both technical and political levels at this ministry, H.E. Mr Tuon Thavrak, has been engaging in the processes for formulating and monitoring the 5-year socio-economic development plan, currently called National Strategic Development Plan (NSDP). He is also a member of the Supreme National Economic Council (SNEC). Within the MRC working mechanism, H.E. Thavrak had been involved in the BDP process as member of the National BDP Subcommittee and member of National BDP-NIP Working Group. Until present, H.E. Thavrak is still member of the National BDP-NIP Working Group and actively helps improving the inter-linkages between the NSDP, MRC-BDS and NIP. Mme Sirivanh Khonthapane National Advisor, Lao National Mekong Committee Mme Sirivanh spent her time working at Ministry of Planning and Investment (MPI) for more than 30 years, serving as Director General of National Economic Research Institute (NERI) for 7 years, and most recently Assistant Minister for 4 years and was joint editor of a book on Transnational Dynamics in Southeast Asia: The Greater Mekong Subregion and Malacca Straits Economic Corridor ISEAS: She graduated from the former USSR and Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in Singapore, National University of Singapore and Lee Kuan Yew Fellow Program at John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. 133

154 Annex A Forum Booklet PARALLEL SESSION 3A: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BASIN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY (CONTINUED) PRESENTERS: Knowledge gaps on sediments and fisheries: science or advocacy? Dr. Rinus Vis Senior expert and Manager, Sustainable Use of Water and Soil Deltares, The Netherlands Dr. Vis graduated in Physical Geography from the University of Amsterdam. After research work and teaching assignments in various countries, he joined Delft Hydraulics (now Deltares) in He specialized in policy analysis and sustainable and environmentally sound water resources development and worked on a variety of projects in more than 30 countries. Impacts of land use change on erosion rates and sediment yields and reservoir sedimentation, are central themes in his research and consultancy activities. Besides, Dr. Vis developed as an expertise on Environmental Planning and Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA). Since 1991 he lectures Environmental Impact Assessment at the UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education in Delft, the Netherlands. As environmental specialist he was involved in the Mekong Flood Management and Mitigation project (FMMP Component 2, Structural Measures and Flood Proofing), the Ho Chi Minh City Flood and Inundation Management Project and in the Economic, Social and Environmental Impact Assessment of basin-wide water resources development scenarios for the Lower Mekong. Abstract Two of the crucial identified knowledge gaps in the current Basin Development Strategy relate to sediments and fisheries. Knowledge production in these areas is vast yet consensus and common understanding on the key figures are lacking, resulting in a mixture of science and advocacy when it comes to influencing decision making. The presentation will lay out the key known figures and asks who s right, who s wrong and what to do to close the knowledge (or understanding) gap. Sediments Until recently trends in the sediment load of the Mekong River were hard to establish due to a lack of long and consistent time series. Nevertheless, it was generally agreed that sediment loads in the upper reaches had increased over the period , and decreased after the construction of the 134

155 Annex A Forum Booklet Manwan Hydropower dam. These changes were not significant in the lower reaches of the river, and the long term average annual sediment load of the river at its mouth was thought to remain at about 145 Mt per year. However, results of the recent sediment monitoring indicate that suspended sediment at Pakse have decreased from an average of 145 Mt/year ( ) to about 65 Mt/year in the years Amounts of sediment leaving the catchment are further reduced by increased sand mining activities. For the near future, trapping of sediments by mainstream and tributary dams and sand mining will further reduce the amount of sediment in the lower reaches of the river. On the other hand, catchment degradation and soil erosion are expected to increase in the short to medium term. Fisheries production Data provided by national governments and compiled by FAO on commercial inland capture fisheries shown an increase in the annual catch between 1995 and 2010 in Cambodia, but in Thailand Vietnam and Lao PDR commercial catches remained relatively stable. Over the same period aquaculture production in Thailand doubled, from 200,000 to 400,000 ton/year, Viet Nam experienced a six fold increase, from 300 to 1,900 tons/year. In Cambodia the growth of the capture fisheries could continue in the short term, whereas production in Lao PDR, Thailand and Viet Nam is thought to stabilize. Aquaculture is likely to expand rapidly in Cambodia and Lao PDR, in response to growing domestic demand. With regard to aquaculture in Thailand, it is anticipated that production levels will steadily rise in the foreseeable future, in Viet Nam, the dramatic rate of increase in aquaculture production in recent years will begin to slow down and further expansion will only take place in response to growing domestic and export market demand. 135

156 Annex A Forum Booklet Making the basin-wide fisheries management and development strategy Dr. Sam Nuov Chair, Technical Advisory Body for Fisheries Management for Dr. Sam Nuov is a fisheries scientist with experience in fisheries impact assessments of water development projects. As the first regional Programme Officer he actively participated in the design, formulation and implementation support of the initial MRC Fisheries Programme s regional projects. In his function as Deputy Director General of the Cambodian Fisheries Administration he is a founding member of the Technical Advisory Body for Fisheries Management (TAB) in the LMB. He recently chaired the first regional consultation on the Basin-wide Fisheries Management and Development Strategy. Abstract: The Technical Advisory Body for Fisheries Management in the Lower Mekong Basin (TAB) is currently preparing, with the support of the MRC Fisheries Programme, a basinwide fisheries management and development strategy (BFMS). This is a key action from the current Basin Development Strategy and directly contributing to the MRC Strategic Plan ( ). This presentation provides an overview of the current draft of the BFMS so as to discuss and facilitate the integration of the BFMS into the updated Basin Development Strategy. The BFMS is conceptualized as both a strategy for regional fisheries management and development as well as a framework of cooperation among fisheries stakeholders of the MRC Member Countries. The strategic priority areas will address key issues such as sustainable use and conservation of fisheries resources, stakeholder participation, gender equity in fisheries management and development, and property rights in fisheries. The objective of the BFMS is Basin-wide sustainable fisheries management and development by Member Countries which is facilitated and implemented through consensus, dialogue and harmonization of national sectoral plans. The BFMS proposes ten key strategic priorities and actions clustered under (I) monitoring of key indicators with regards to (a) fish diversity, abundance and ecology, and (b) socio-economics, livelihoods, food security, and gender to observe and document changes and impacts in capture fisheries sector and other sectors, (II) management related priorities, where the BFMS promotes proactive regional engagement, and (III) priorities related to water development, where a responsive and advisory role of the BFMS is envisaged. Under the management related strategic priorities the BFMS promotes proactive regional engagement in support of management of sustainable fisheries. The strategic priority actions include conservation of key habitats, fisheries enhancement, fisheries and agriculture (fish-friendly 136

157 Annex A Forum Booklet irrigation), and fisheries co-management including transboundary fisheries management. It is foreseen that the implementation of the BFMS through the Member Countries will be guided and promoted by the TAB and thus strengthen the regional fisheries sector identity of one of the most productive inland fisheries in the world. 137

158 Annex A Forum Booklet PANEL MEMBERS FOR DISCUSSION Knowledge gaps on sediments and fisheries: science or advocacy? Making the basin-wide fisheries management and development strategy. Mr. Marc Goichot Lead Sustainable Hydropower and River Basin Management WWF Greater Mekong Marc Goichot studied Geography, Integrated River Basin Management, Geomorphology, and Vietnamese Studies. Marc has spent the past 19 years in Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand and Lao PDR as a technical and policy adviser. He s work has included advising the Thua Thien Hue Provincial Peoples Committee and IUCN on the Huong River Basin Management Plan and the management of the Coastal Lagoon system of Thua Thien Hue Province; aiding the International Federation of Red Cross on Flood Mitigation and Preparedness in the Mekong delta; and, for the past 13 years, WWF-Greater Mekong s Programme on Integrated River Basin Management. Marc is a member of the WWF Global Reference Group on Water Security, promoting responsible water infrastructure and securing sustainable flows to safeguard hydrological regimes that freshwater flora and fauna rely on, while meeting water demands for basic needs, social and economic development. Mr. Alan Brooks Director, World Fish Center Alan obtained his M.Sc. in Aquaculture and Fisheries Management in 1988 and joined WorldFish as Portfolio Director for South Asia in January He has international programme development experience from almost two decades of working in poverty-sensitive fisheries and aquaculture development in five developing countries (22 years in Thailand, India, Bangladesh, Zambia and Malawi). The wider international experience complements over 10 years senior project management and 2 years monitoring of natural resource portfolio of livelihood projects in Bangladesh. His current focus is on post disaster response mechanisms and coping strategies for fisheries and aquaculture, cage culture for ethnic minority groups, wetland management approaches and cross cutting issues such as climate change, environmental impact, global trade, gender, socio-economic issues. 138

159 Annex A Forum Booklet Mr. Sommano Phounsavath Director, Division of Fisheries, Department of Livestock and Fisheries, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Lao PDR Mr. Sommano Phounsavath started to work at the Division of Aquaculture Extension under the Department of Livestock and Veterinary (now DLF) in 1993 after graduation from the former USSR (M.Sc. in Animal Husbandry, Moscow Veterinary Academy). In 1997, he went for study at the Asian Institute of Technology (AIT) and graduated in 1998 (M.Sc. in Aquaculture and Aquatic Resources Management), he then worked as a researcher at the newly established Living Aquatic Resources Research Center (LARReC) for the period from 1999 to His field of work focused on inland capture fisheries and fisheries co-management. He was the National Project Coordinator for the MRC Fisheries Programme s component on reservoir fisheries for the period from 2000 to In 2013, he moved to the Division of Fisheries, Department of Livestock and Fisheries (DLF). In 2014, he was promoted to the position of the Director of the Division of Fisheries, DLF. Since 2013, he was assigned as the National Technical Manager for the MRC Fisheries Programme ( ) at DLF. Beside this he is also a member of the Scientific Council of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF). Mr. Nguyen Van Trong Deputy Director, Research Institute for Aquaculture No.2 (RIA2), Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam Mr. Nguyen Van Trong holds B. Sc and M Sc. in aquaculture. He has worked at RIA2 since 1980 as researcher on inland fisheries resources and aquaculture in the Mekong Delta. From 1997 to 2001 he was assigned by Vietnamese Government to the MRC Secretariat as a Program Officer of the MRC Fisheries Programme. Currently, being a manager, he is now responsible for research management of RIA2 related to fisheries resources and aquaculture development in the Mekong Delta. 139

160 Annex A Forum Booklet PARALLEL SESSION 3B: ASSESSMENT OF BENEFIT SHARING Benefit sharing on international rivers: principles and lessons from experience Professor David Grey Oxford University Centre for the Environment, UK; Exeter University Department of Politics, UK; Member of the Global Agenda Council on Water Security, World Economic Forum, Switzerland; and Member of the MRC BDP Independent Panel of Experts (IPOE) Professor David Grey is Visiting Professor of Water Policy at Oxford University. He was World Bank staff from 1983 to 2009 and its Senior Water Advisor from 2003, with oversight responsibility for the Bank s global water agenda. He has 40 years experience working on water in many countries on every continent. He teaches, develops inter-disciplinary water security networks, and remains engaged in water issues worldwide, in particular facilitating cooperation on major international river basins. He is well known globally for his expertise on benefit sharing. Abstract Cooperative development of international rivers offers greater overall economic advantages than unilateral development, bringing benefits that no individual country could achieve alone. Cooperation allows the river basin to be managed and developed as a system, yielding optimum outcomes in developing opportunities and mitigating risks, which is the goal of integrated water resources management. Achieving effective cooperation among riparian countries will always require some level of benefit sharing. Experience suggests that countries cooperate in the management of transboundary waters not when compelled by principles, but when the net benefits of cooperation are perceived to be greater than the net benefits of noncooperation, and the distribution of these net benefits is perceived to be fair. Benefits themselves go beyond the obvious, and can be captured in a simple typology. This describes four types of benefits: environmental benefits to the river (e.g. improved water quality, conserved biodiversity); economic benefits from the river (e.g. increased food and energy production); reduction of costs because of the river (e.g. reduced geo-political tensions, enhanced flood management); and benefits beyond the river (catalysing wider cooperation and economic integration). Any one of these four benefit types can promote cooperation, but the broader the basket of benefits, the greater the scope for structuring mutually beneficial cooperation. 140

161 Annex A Forum Booklet Focusing on sharing the benefits derived from the multiple uses of water, rather than just physical water allocation, provides greater scope for identifying mutually beneficial outcomes. In addition, benefit (and cost) sharing can promote more efficient and equitable river basin management by separating the physical distribution of river development (where activities are undertaken), from the economic distribution of benefits/costs (who profits from/pays for those activities.) Case studies will be described, including the Columbia River Basin, the Lesotho Highlands Water Project and the Senegal River Basin, examining how the benefits and costs of cooperative development were quantified and a formula developed for sharing them, and the institutional mechanism established to manage these benefit sharing mechanisms. Examples of investment and benefit sharing in the Mekong region Representative, Private sector irrigation/hydropower developer in Cambodia Representative, Private sector hydropower developer in Lao PDR 141

162 Annex A Forum Booklet PANEL MEMBERS FOR DISCUSSION Benefit sharing on international rivers: principles and lessons from experience Examples of investment and benefit sharing in the Mekong region. Mr. Alfred Nakatsuma Director of Regional Environment Programs, USAID Asia, Bangkok Mr. Nakatsuma oversees US Government programs in climate change mitigation, adaptation, clean energy, urban resilience, sustainable fisheries, anti-wildlife trafficking and sustainable development of the Mekong sub-region. Previous assignments include Jakarta, Manila, Tokyo, Washington DC, Guatemala City, La Paz and Lima. He graduated with a B.S. in Civil Engineering from Stanford University, a M.A. in Economics and a M.Pl. in Urban and Regional Planning from University of Southern California. He speaks five languages including Spanish, Indonesian, Portuguese and Japanese. Dr. Therese Sjömander Magnusson Director of Transboundary Waters Management, Stockholm International Water Institute, Stockholm In her position at SIWI she is also the Manager of the UNDP Shared Waters Partnership program and the Director for the newly established UNESCO center at SIWI. Before joining SIWI in 2013, she worked for the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (Sida) for 10 years, where she served as the Senior Advisor for Water Resources Management and Water and Sanitation. Dr. Sjömander Magnusson is a geographer by training and has a PhD in water resources management from Linköping University in Sweden. 142

163 Annex A Forum Booklet Ms. Le Thi Ngoc Quynh Deputy Director of Science, Technology and Environment Department, Vietnam Electricity Corporation (EVN) She is working for EVN for 15 years in the field of management of environmental and social aspects in EVN projects. She got her Engineer Degree in Prague Institute of Chemistry technologies Czech Republic and Master of Environmental Science in Chiang Mai University Thailand. Ms. Quynh has been working for the issue of benefit sharing in many projects between ASEAN countries as well as benefit sharing activities of Vietnam Mekong river committee. Mr. Wiboon Pongtepupathum Director, Project for Hydropower Development at Irrigation Dams, Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand Mr. Wiboon Pongtepupathum graduated in Civil Engineering from Chulalongkorn University in He then obtained the Master Degree in Civil Engineering (Soil Engineering) from Chulalongkorn University in Since 1983, he has joined the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand, where he specialized in planning, study, design, engineering during construction and management of hydropower projects. Now he is the Director, Project for Hydropower Development at Irrigation Dams, Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand. 143

164 Annex A Forum Booklet PARALLEL SESSION 3B: ASSESSMENT OF BENEFIT SHARING (CONTINUED) Cumulative impact assessment of the national water resources development plans Dr. Thanapon Piman Water and Climate Change Specialist, Climate Change and Adaptation Initiative, MRCS Dr. Thanapon Piman is Water and Climate Change Specialist under Climate Change and Adaptation Initiative, Mekong River Commission (MRC), Lao PDR. He has a doctoral degree in Water Resource Engineering and Management from the Asian Institute of Technology, Thailand. During he worked for MRC s Basin Development Plan Programme with responsibilities for the assessment of basin-wide development scenarios, hydrological modelling, developing irrigation and hydropower databases, and producing a planning atlas. His current work with the MRC focuses on climate change analysis, climate change projection and modelling, basin-wide assessment of climate change impacts on hydrology, flood and drought, as well as developing database systems on climate change and adaptation for supporting the Lower Mekong Countries. Abstract Cumulative impact assessment of the national water resources development plans of the Mekong counties was carried out in in order to provide an appreciation of how different water-related developments within the basin impact upon economic, environmental and social objectives of the MRC member countries, so as to enable the examination of the synergies and trade-offs between different types of development. Development scenarios were formulated to represent different combinations of nationally planned sector development, with a focus on public and industrial water supply, irrigation, hydropower, and flood protection. The scenarios selected by LMB country scenarios fall into four main categories: baseline situation (year 2000), definite future situation (2015), foreseeable future situation (2030), and long-term future situation (2060). The scenarios for the foreseeable future and longer-term future were assessed with and without climate change. The LMB countries agreed to assess the scenarios against 42 economic, environmental, and social criteria that provide a picture of how well each scenario meets the socioeconomic development and environment protection objectives of each country. The assessment results show that flows in the Mekong mainstream will be significantly redistributed from the wet season to the dry season, particularly by ongoing hydropower development with large storage reservoirs in the upper Mekong basin. Major negative impacts are the loss of capture fisheries (25% basin-wide), the further reduction of 144

165 Annex A Forum Booklet wetlands, and loss of biodiversity and recession rice. In the foreseeable future situation, the economic losses in vulnerable sectors are substantial, being a total of NPV US$ 3,041 million. However, the overall incremental economic benefits of all new and planned water resources developments of the MRC Member Countries are large (NPV US$ 33,386 million). Both benefits and negative impacts of the considered scenarios are spread unevenly across the four countries, which highlights the need for transboundary cooperation to reach mutually acceptable decisions. A recent review of the assessment findings in 2014 indicated that they remain largely valid. The presentation focuses on providing the quantified positive and negative impacts of the basin-wide development scenarios, with a view to building common understandings on development opportunities and the associated risks. The Study on Sustainable Management and Development of the Mekong River including Impacts by Mainstream Hydropower Projects Dr. Henry Manguerra Council Study Coordinator, Mekong River Commission Secretariat, Vientiane Dr. Manguerra has more than 20 years of international experience in water resources management and environmental protection. Before becoming the Council Study Coordinator, Dr. Manguerra for more than 15 years, managed and led multidisciplinary teams in the U.S. to provide consulting services to federal, state and local government agencies in support of the U.S. Clean Water Act. His experience also includes technical assistance to developing countries that are funded by USAID, USTDA, World Bank, and ADB. These projects ranged from agriculture development, irrigation and drainage, watershed and water quality studies, water and sanitation, and natural resources management. Dr. Manguerra received his education and training in the Philippines, Thailand, and the U.S. Abstract Building on the assessments done by MRC BDP and others, the Study on Sustainable Management and Development of the Mekong River, including Impacts by Mainstream Hydropower Projects was conceptualized primarily to fill the knowledge gaps and minimize the uncertainty in the assessments of impacts of major water and related resources uses in the Mekong River basin. The rapid development in the Mekong River region requires that the data and knowledge are made available and assessment methodologies and tools are continued to be refined to accurately and 145

166 Annex A Forum Booklet with greater confidence assess both the negative and positive impacts (including cumulative and transboundary impacts) of planned developments. With environmental, social, and economic impacts of planned developments better understood and quantified geographically and temporally, appropriate measures can be identified to enhance the benefits and mitigate the negative impacts throughout the Lower Mekong Basin. This presentation will cover the knowledge gaps and uncertainties related to impact assessment that are now better understood through various MRCS Programme initiatives and in support of the Council Study. In addition, the Council Study s plan and methodology for assessing both the individual and cumulative environmental and socioeconomic impacts of planned developments in the irrigation, agriculture, hydropower, navigation, flood protection, and domestic and industrial sectors will also be presented. The Council Study builds on existing MRC knowledge and structures. Similarly, the results of the assessments of the Council Study including the resulting enhanced knowledgebase and policy recommendations will inform future update of the Basin Development Strategy including their implementations through the MRC Strategic Plan and National Indicative Plans. 146

167 Annex A Forum Booklet PANEL MEMBERS FOR DISCUSSION Cumulative impact assessment of the national water resources development plans of the Mekong countries The Study on the Sustainable Development and Management of the Mekong River H.E. Mr Watt Botkosal Deputy Secretary General National BDP Coordinator National Mekong IWRM Project Coordinator Cambodia National Mekong Committee Secretariat H.E. Mr Watt Botkosal is Deputy Secretary General of the Cambodia National Mekong Committee Secretariat. H.E. Watt chairs the Cambodia Water Partnership for six years and coordinates the National Basin Development Plan Programme for 15 years and the Mekong-IWRM Project of MRC for six years. H.E. Watt has good working experiences in natural resources management and planning and capacity building; programmes and projects implementation, coordination and facilitation of the national workshops, consultations and dialogues. He obtained Executive Master of Business Administration on Human Resources Management from the Asian Institute of Technology in 2002 and a Master of Science on Forestry Science from the Technical University of Wood Technology and Forestry in Zvolen, Slovak Republic in Prof. Chaiyuth Sukhsri Advisor, Thai National Mekong Committee (TNMC) Secretariat Prof. Chaiyuth is the advisor to the TNMCS and a member of the TNMC. His previous positions include Head of the Department of Water Resources Engineering at Chulalongkorn University and Team Leader of the Water Utilization Programme at the Mekong River Commission Secretariat. 147

168 Annex A Forum Booklet Mr. Voradeth Phonekeo Programme Coordinator, Initiative for Sustainable Hydropower, MRCS Mr. Voradeth holds a Master of Science in Hydropower Engineering. He served the Government of Lao PDR for more than twenty years in the field of hydropower. He has wide experience in assembly and maintenance of hydro generators and hydro turbines and has been involved with feasibility studies of large hydropower projects. In many hydropower projects in Lao PDR, he has also been an active participant in all stages of hydropower development and in many aspects such as power purchases negotiation, concession agreement, and public consultation at all levels. His other involvement includes collaborating in the preparation of the EIA and EMP guidelines for Hydropower in Lao PDR as well as Civil Standard for Hydropower dams in Lao PDR. Prior to joining the MRCS, he worked as IWRM National Planning Expert. Since 2008 he is leading the MRC Initiative on Sustainable Hydropower. 148

169 Annex A Forum Booklet PARALLEL SESSION 3B: ASSESSMENT OF BENEFIT SHARING (CONTINUED) Formulation of long-term exploratory scenarios to investigate how regional benefits can be increased Mr. Malcolm Wallace Senior expert and BDP Scenario Assessment Team member (see bio above) Abstract The socio-economic and environmental impacts of alternative medium and long term national plans to develop the water resources of the LMB were cumulatively assessed as part of the preparations for formulating the Basin Development Strategy A recent review of these assessment findings in 2014 indicated that they remain largely valid (see earlier presentation). These assessment results indicate that, whilst substantial economic benefits can be gained from these plans, the plans as formulated would lead to significant adverse environmental and social transboundary impacts. Furthermore, the plans do not comprehensively address longer term development needs, nor do they provide a comprehensive response to addressing rising flood risks and mitigating the adverse impacts and protecting the environment in line with the commitments made in the 1995 Mekong Agreement. The draft BDS for acknowledges the need to broaden and deepen the basin planning and assessment approach adopted by MRC in order to better address the central aim of promoting optimal and sustainable development of the Basin s water and related natural resources. A process has already commenced to explore alternative long term scenarios to examine important trade-offs in the light of expected future water resource management needs. This presentation outlines the steps being taken in the formulation of long-term exploratory scenarios to investigate how regional benefits can be increased. 149

170 Annex A Forum Booklet Approach to regional benefit sharing in the Mekong region Mr. Ton Lennaerts International Technical Advisor to the Basin Development Plan Programme, Mekong River Commission, Vientiane (see bio above) Abstract: Regional benefit sharing is practiced in many international river basins throughout the world. It comes in many forms to suit the riparian states, but is always founded on winwin outcomes for the participating countries. The presentation will demonstrate that regional benefit sharing lies at the heart of the 1995 Mekong Agreement. The principles of regional benefit sharing are established in the Agreement s commitments to optimise mutual benefits, promote interdependent sub-regional growth and cooperation and pursue joint and/or basin-wide development projects. The Agreement also commits the countries to minimise harmful effects. Optimal development can best be achieved through joint exploration and assessment of alternative basin-wide development scenarios (see earlier presentation), studies that will serve to reduce knowledge gaps, guidelines that promote best practice, and effective and appropriate application of MRC Procedures, including the PNPCA. Steps are already being taken by MRC in each of these areas. The two principle mechanisms to enhance regional benefit sharing are national projects of basin-wide significance, which create development opportunities elsewhere in the basin, and joint projects, which address issues and opportunities that one country alone could not do as effectively. Examples of such projects will be given. To ensure the full realisation of benefits from these mechanisms, supplementary understandings or agreements (deal structures) are likely to be required. The initiated new scenario assessments will support the increase of the number and positive impacts of such projects. When the results demonstrate significant increases in national benefits and decreases in transboundary impacts, the countries have powerful incentives to adapt current national plans to better capture the benefits of cooperation, to minimize adverse impacts and to establish a pathway towards optimal development of the basin. 150

171 Annex A Forum Booklet PANEL MEMBERS FOR DISCUSSION Formulation of long-term exploratory scenarios to investigate how regional benefits can be increased Approach to regional benefit sharing in the Mekong region Dr. Eric Kemp-Benedict Director Stockholm Environment Institute, Asia Center, Bangkok Dr. Eric is responsible for research, administrative and financial leadership of SEI Asia and serves as the main contact for key partners and donors. He is also part of SEI s international management and helps coordinate the Asia Centre s interactions with headquarters and with SEI colleagues worldwide. Prior to this role, he was a senior scientist in SEI s U.S. Centre in Boston and leader of SEI s Rethinking Development Research theme. His research focuses on cross-disciplinary policy analysis for sustainable development strategies. He has actively developed and applied tools and methods for participatory and study-specific sustainability analyses. This work has been funded by international organizations, government agencies, and non-governmental organizations. Dr. Kemp-Benedict s current research interest is the macroeconomics of a sustainability transition. He has a B.S. in physics from the University of Texas in Austin and a Ph.D. in theoretical physics from Boston University in 1997, as well as an MAT in secondary physics education. Dr. Huong Thuy Phan Nguyen Programme Coordinator, CCAI, MRCS Dr. Phan is a specialist in water and environmental management. By training she has a Doctor of Engineering in Water Resource Development. Phan is a hydrodynamic and morphological modeller and environmental researcher with more than 25 years of combined experiences in hydropower development projects in the South of Viet Nam, coastal engineering projects in the Gulf of Thailand, and climate change risk assessment projects in the Vietnam s Red River Delta and the Lower Mekong Basin. Prior to joining MRCS Phan worked for the Asian Institute of Technology in Viet Nam during as a water and environment specialist and lecturer. She led many education and consultancy projects in environmental governance, climate change responses, disaster mitigation and management and renewable energy development. She was a research scientist 151

172 Annex A Forum Booklet at the University of Twente, the Netherlands during ; a research engineer at the Asian Institute of Technology in ; a water resource engineer at Viet Nam Ministry of Energy in ; and Board of Construction Viet Nam Institute of Hygiene, in Dr. Rathana Peou South East Asia Regional Scenarios Coordinator, CGIAR She currently sits in different major advisory boards of the region as the one of Food Security for Aids and International Development Forum as well as on the Asia Pacific Migration Environment Network (APMEN). She joined as well the advisory board of the Minister of Commerce of Cambodia where she is based. She is also a visiting Professor and a visiting researcher at the Bangladesh Centre of Advanced Studies (BCAS) as well as a fellow at the International Research Centre on Sustainability (University of Reims) and IDDRI (SciPo Paris). She holds a PhD in Political Science majoring in Philosophy and a minor in Arabic and a Master's degree in Political Science and Philosophy. Dr. Rathana's research interests lies in the 4 inviolate principles : food security, water security, energy security and social health security. Dr. Rathana has been researching on climate induced migration in Bangladesh and as well the weight of remittance on local development and maladaptation. Her current research lies on the futures of Food Security, Agriculture and Climate Change in the ASEAN countries and how multi-stakeholders socio-economic scenarios could open policy dialogue and guide Climate Smart Investment. Prior to joining the CCAFS team she worked for 3 years in Bangladesh where she was the deputy director of the Centre for Sustainable Development (CSD) and an associate professor ULAB. Before 2009, Rathana worked as an international consultant and humanitarian workers in Sudan, Pakistan and Bangladesh. She has worked with and consulted for agencies such as DFID, USAID, ECHO, DIPECHO, AFD, EU, ADB and different INGOs and NGOs developing guideline of reporting and program evaluation in humanitarian crisis countries. 152

173 Annex A Forum Booklet PARALLEL SESSION 3C: UPDATING THE BASIN DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Greater Mekong Subregion Regional Investment Framework Mr. Raza M. Farrukh Water Resources Specialist, South East Asia Department, Asian Development Bank, Manila Mr. Farrukh is Water Resources Specialist, based at ADB Headquarters in Manila, looking after the South East Asia Water Portfolio. He has more than 25 years of experience in water resources development and management; irrigation, drainage, and flood management; urban and rural water supply, and rural development; policy and institutional reforms; portfolio and project management; procurement and contracts management as well as evaluation of projects in South and South-East Asia. He has also contributed to publications and manuals on Water Management, Irrigation and other development issues. Abstract The Regional Investment Framework (RIF) puts into operation the new Greater Mekong Subregion Economic Program Strategic Framework (GMS-SF ) that was approved at the 4 th GMS Summit in December The RIF translates the strategic directions of the GMS-SF into a pipeline of investment and technical assistance projects for the third decade of the GMS Program, from 2013 to The RIF covers a wide range of sectors including transport, energy, environment, agriculture, human resource development, information and communication technology, urban development, and tourism transport and trade facilitation. The guiding principles for developing the RIF were (i) ensuring that proposed investments for corridor development are demand driven; (ii) striking a balance between promoting external connectivity and domestic connectivity; (iii) adopting a multi-sector approach and emphasizing the software requirements of trade and transport facilitation; (iv) recognizing new and emerging priority areas, such as urban development linked to corridors, special economic zones, logistics centres, and multimodal transport linkages; and (v) prioritizing specific geographic areas based on sound criteria and strategic sequencing of projects. The RIF was prepared through a bottom-up approach based on extensive country inputs and consultations. The preparation process began with initial assessments of each sector supported by (i) sector road maps, projects and plans developed by the GMS sector forums, working groups, and task forces; and (ii) preliminary pipelines of subregional projects included in ADB country partnership strategies and country operations business plans. The identification, screening, and selections of projects for inclusion in the RIF was also subject to numerous consultations, culminating in the final RIF endorsed at the 19 th GMS Ministerial Conference in Vientiane, Lao PDR in December

174 Annex A Forum Booklet As a comprehensive, forward-looking and strategic framework, the RIF embodies the collective aspiration of the GMS countries to expand and deepen their cooperation program in the coming decade. The RIF will also remain a living framework that will be regularly reviewed and updated to maintain its relevance and responsiveness as a planning tool for subregional activities in an everdynamic GMS. The more than 200 potential investment and technical assistance (TA) projects included in the RIF reflect the tremendous level of interest and commitment among the GMS countries to strengthen subregional cooperation. To translate the RIF pipeline into concrete projects, an implementation plan has been prepared by identifying priority projects ready for implementation over next 5 years ( ). A monitoring and evaluation system is being developed to monitor the project-specific outputs and outcomes in the context of broader impacts on subregional cooperation and connectivity. Strengthening ASEAN-MRC Cooperation Ms WAN Joon Lian Assistant Director Initiative for ASEAN Integration and Narrowing Development Gap (IAI&NDG) Division ASEAN Secretariat, Jakarta Ms Wan Joon Lian leads the IAI&NDG Division, which manages cooperation and activities related to the narrowing of development gap and initiative for ASEAN integration for CLMV countries. She was in the External Economic Relations Division of the ASEAN Secretariat for 4 years, negotiating and monitoring the implementation of ASEAN+1 free trade agreements (FTAs). She currently services the negotiation on economic and technical cooperation of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). Extensive part of her career was with the private sector in Kuala Lumpur, working closely with the government in formulating country s position for trade negotiations, enhancing competitiveness of the manufacturing sector, as well as facilitating trade and investment. Abstract Sub-regional cooperation plays an important role in contributing towards narrowing of development gap in ASEAN. It serves as a platform to address common challenges and development constraints of member countries through strategies and actions that are more suitable to their particular circumstances. The Mekong River Commission (MRC) s programmes relating to the sustainable management of water and related resources, including agriculture and irrigation as well as fisheries are important in spurring economic development and improving sociowelfare of the people, especially those in the rural areas. Among the three main sub-regional cooperation in ASEAN, the Mekong sub- 154

175 Annex A Forum Booklet region has the most variety of cooperation mechanisms and the largest number of development partners. Coordination and cooperation among development partners supporting the regional, sub-regional and bilateral activities are important to maximise utilisation of resources and minimise duplication of efforts. harmonisation between sub-regional strategies and related ASEAN s commitments as well as initiatives are critical in achieving concrete results and benefits from regional and sub-regional programmes. Discussion and recommendations from this forum will serve as valuable inputs to the ASEAN Community post-2015 strategies and the new IAI Work Plan that are being formulated. Member countries of MRC are also ASEAN s Member States. Therefore, alignment and The IFC, the private sector and the updated Basin Development Strategy Ms. Kate Lazarus Senior Operation Officer in Asia, International Finance Corporation Kate Lazarus is an E&S Advisory Senior Operations Officer in Asia for IFC. She developed and manages an advisory program on environmental and social standards in the hydropower sector in the Mekong Region and Nepal. Her expertise focuses on water governance, multi-stakeholder dialogues, natural resources management, environmental flows, cumulative impact assessment and management, and human rights. She has a keen interest in understanding the role of China around the world. Abstract In the Mekong region, hydropower is developing fast. Tributary rivers throughout the region still have huge potential for hydropower development, and energy demands from neighbouring countries are growing. Whilst the development can spur economic growth and alleviate poverty, it is equally important to raise environmental and social standards to ensure that the region s rich natural resources are managed sustainably. Investing in sound environmental and social standards helps the private sector manage their project risk and improve business performance. Through this presentation, IFC will share information about its sustainable hydropower program in the Mekong region and provide comments on the MRC s Basin Development Strategy from a private sector perspective. We will offer up some suggestions on how to meaningfully engage with the private sector and ensure they are a key stakeholder in the uptake of the strategy. 155

176 Annex A Forum Booklet Some Perspectives from research institutes and NGOs Dr. Chayanis Krittasudthacheewa Deputy Director Stockholm Environment Institute, Asia Centre, Bangkok Dr. Chayanis has extensive experience in research management and coordination with multi-stakeholders and specializes in the fields of hydrology, integrated water resources management, climate change impact assessment and water resources modelling. She leads the Sustainable Mekong Research Network (SUMERNET), a research network of 50 member institutes delivering credible research to influence sustainable development policy. She also leads the Ayeyarwady Futures program to support evidence based multi-stakeholder engagement in water resources management and development in Myanmar. She serves as the Steering Committee member of the Mekong Program on Environment Water and Resilience (M-POWER). She previously worked as a Programme Officer at the MRC and a water resources engineer for a number of consulting firms in Thailand. She holds a Ph.D. in Hydrology and Water Resources Engineering from the University of Tokyo, Japan with two distinguished prizes. 156

177 Annex A Forum Booklet The updated Basin Development Strategy: the MRC view on priorities, implementation and impact monitoring Dr. Anoulak Kittikhoun Programme Coordinator, BDP, MRCS (see bio above) Mr. Santi Baran Monitoring and Evaluation Specialist, TCU, MRCS Mr. Santi Baran is an M&E and Organizational Capacity Development expert with over 10 years of relevant experience in the field and region. Mr. Santi s OCD experience ranges from the development of tools and consultancy in Project Cycle Management, results-based M&E, logical frameworks, key performance indicator development, HR Score Cards, and overall leadership skills. Throughout Mr. Santi s career he has had the opportunity to gain both academic and applied OCD experience, having completed his Master in Organizational Development while also holding a number of positions focused on OCD position for government, international NGOs, and private sector entities. In the last 4 years, Mr. Santi has been working for the Mekong River Commission, first as a Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Program Officer and more recently as a Senior Monitoring and Evaluation specialist, where he has gained further experience in designing logical frameworks, implementing results-based M&E frameworks, designing web-based M&E systems, as well as conducting M&E training and designing M&E training materials. Abstract Following the presentation at the plenary session, this presentation will dig deeper into how the Basin Development Strategy will be implemented through the MRC Strategic Plan at the regional level and the National Indicative Plan at the national levels. Impact monitoring and evaluation will be outlined including through the State of the Basin monitoring and reporting for the BDS and a consolidated M&E framework for the MRC Strategic Plan and NIPs. 157

178 Annex A Forum Booklet Critical reviews of the draft updated Basin Development Strategy Dr. John Dore Senior Regional Water Resources Specialist, Australia s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade John s role is the provision of expert advice to Australia s DFAT in relation to the design, management, monitoring and evaluation of the effectiveness of both specific DFAT water resources partnership initiatives and Australia s overall engagement in the sector in East and South Asia. John was an undergraduate at University of Melbourne, postgraduate at the Australian National University (PhD in Deliberative Water Governance), and has been working full-time in Asia for the past 15 years. Professor David Grey Oxford University Centre for the Environment, UK (see bio above) 158

179 Annex A Forum Booklet PANEL MEMBERS FOR DISCUSSION The updated Basin Development Strategy: the MRC view on priorities, implementation and impact monitoring Critical reviews of the draft update Basin Development Strategy Mr. Russell James Executive Director, Murray-Darling Basin Authority, Canberra, Australia Mr. Russell has been Executive Director of Policy and Planning within the Murray-Darling Basin Authority since 2011, and has previously worked in the Prime Minister's department and the Federal Department of the Environment. Mr James has been a major contributor to Australian water reforms including the Federal Water Act 2007 and the National Water Initiative. He also was instrumental in structural adjustment of the Australian federal fishing industry. He started his career in the private forestry sector. Mr. Nguyen Hong Toan National Advisor for the update IWRM-based Basin Development Strategy, Viet Nam Studied in the Water Resources University, Ha Noi, Viet Nam and University of Roorkee in India. Mr Toan had been working for the Electricity Planning and Designing Institute, Ministry of Energy and Coal ( ); Scientific and Technical Management Department, and International Cooperation Department of Water Resources Ministry ( ); and joined the Division of Resources Development, Mekong Secretariat from and worked for Viet Nam National Mekong Committee from With more than 30 years of extensive integrated water resources management experience: in policy and institutional and capacity development, both at national and regional levels. Mr Toan has spent considerable part of his career to build extensive practical experience in policy and institutional analysis. As the Secretary General of the Viet Nam National Mekong Committee and Joint Committee Member for the Mekong River Commission, Mr. Toan provided strategic policy advices to the Government of Viet Nam in managing the water and related resources of the Mekong River, in the context of regional cooperation and sustainability of the Mekong River Basin. 159

180 Annex A Forum Booklet Mr. Buree Suwanarat Natural Resources Planning Specialist, Thai National Mekong Committee Secretariat (TNMCS) Mr. Buree Suwanarat is a Natural Resources Planning Specialist for TNMCS. He has been promoted planning process to River Basin Committee in Thailand since BDP Phase 1. At present, another assigned work is National Advisor for updating Basin Development Strategy. He used to work for water resources planning and development in Thailand and neighbouring countries. He has various experiences from policy to detailed design served to international organisation, government agency and private sector. 160

181 Annex A Forum Booklet FIELD TRIP Trip A Hydraulic city of Angkor The Ancient Hydraulic System of Angkor Period Mr. Sok Saing Im Free Lance Consultant, Cambodia Abstract Mr. Sok Saing Im was recently involved in a number of projects in Cambodia in the field of water resource, basin planning, integrated flood risk management planning, hydro-meteorological data collection, studies and training in a number of MRC, ADB and WB projects after serving the MRCS for 10 years as senior hydrologist. Before joining the MRC Secretariat where he has been working as senior hydrologist, he has served as expert in Operational Hydrology for the WMO in the AGRHYMET programme for 10 years, and as lecturer, researcher in the field of agro-hydrology and agro-meteorology for another four years in Mozambique. The Angkor Wat Region was almost completely abandoned for more than six hundred years, only rediscovered by Henri Mouhot in 1860, recent research applying modern technology reveals and reaffirms that Angkor Wat and its surrounding complex infrastructures were not simply dedicated to religious ritual as some archaeologist has suggested. But a rather complex water resource management systems consisting of a dense canals, reservoirs and water control network to produce sufficient foods for nearly one million people consisting of administrators, military, artists, stone carving, fishermen and traders in a region where rainfall occurs only six months a year. After it was blessed at its source near Phnom Koulen, water was diverted, stored, channelled for different uses: domestic, irrigation, religious ritual and symbolism, maintenance of temple infrastructure, groundwater recharge etc. Floods are managed through reservoirs and spreading technique. As spiritual centres, the Angkor temples offers for men search for reality, light and immortality that seekers needs to build through own experiences and inner self through symbols and sculpture. The seven symbols are: the snake, the bird, the five towers, the stepped pyramid, the seven steps, the world axes, and the churning sea of milk. THE SEVEN KEYS 1. The snake has a twofold significance, it embodies the vital energy of life and it represents the dark forces of earth, the forces of chaos in life. 2. The bird, In contrast to the denying forces of earth and darkness portrayed by the serpent, the bird represents the affirming principle of light, the wish to rise above the chaos of life to find inner unity and a meaning to life. 3. The five towers, five gates of perception, these doors are held to be sight, hearing, speech and touch, coordinated and interpreted by the mind. 4. The stepped pyramid, represent the mount Meru 161

182 Annex A Forum Booklet 5. The seven steps, representation of the steps or stages through which the Seeker for Truth must pass on the inner journey from chaos to unity. The seven stages on the evolutionary journey through this world echo the seven worlds of the creation 6. The world of Angkor was at different times centred in whatever temple was chosen or built by the reigning God- King, Because the centre of the Universe was marked by Mount Meru, the thought it fitting to have a Meru in the centre of this capital. 7. The search for Inner Unity is the hidden meaning of the message conveyed by the holy city of Angkor. Churning of the Sea of Milk. The seventh key links the previous six together as a living whole. Trip B Kampong Phluk village Mr. Meng Monyrak Deputy Director, International Conventions and Biodiversity Department, MoE National Project Coordinator, Biodiversity Conservation Corridors Mr. MENG Monyrak has served the Ministry of Environment since He engages in various professional and expertise fields in Environment and natural resources protection and conservation with the government, development partners (ADB and World Bank) and local and inter-government organization (MRCS). He has long working experience in field research, ground truth, project management, project coordination, training to government officers and communities and development of policy and strategy. Mr Monyrak obtained his Master Degree in Environmental Science from Chiang Mai University, Thailand in Abstract The Importance of the Tonle Sap Lake/Kampong Phlouk since historical time till now are: - Highway by that time was high up: Boeung Mealea, Prasat Preah Khan, Staung and North Baray-Phimay. Along this highway and ports, mainland navigation connecting to maritime navigation to overseas for trading purpose should had been developed. - The term Phlouk in Cambodia means Ivory. Kampong Phlouk means Ivory Port. It is believe that in the past there were Ivory trade and other items like animal skins, etc. - Ancient Time: feed in fish and aquatic products to nearly one million of Ancient Angkor population (who were temple builders). Thus, there should be an immense food supplies in that time. - There have been three main ports along the northern coat of TLS Great Lake (Kampong Phlouk, Kampong Khleang (the largest port) and Kampong Svay. They were trading ports with outside world and also fishing port. 162

183 Annex A Forum Booklet 163

184 Annex B List of Participants ANNEX B LIST OF PARTICIPANTS Participants from Academic Institutes, Partners, NGOs, Private Sectors and Civil Society No Name of participant Position Organization 1 Mr. Agus Nugroho SUMERNET Coordinator Stockholm Environment Institute, Asia 2 Mr. Alan Brooks Director WorldFish, Greater Mekong Region 3 Mr. Alfred Nakatsuma Regional Environment Director 4 Dr. Andrew Wells-Dang Political Economy Analysis Team Leader United States Agency for International Development PACT 5 Dr. Anthony Watanabe Managing Director Asia Clean Innovations 6 Ms. Amphavanh Sisouvanh Associate Operation Officer IFC 7 Dr. Asae Sayaka Head of Research and Publication Institut Darul Ridzuan 8 Ms. Bich Nghia Thi Student Mekong Delta Development Research Institute, Can Tho University 9 Mr. Chay Keartha Programme Coordinator CENTDOR 10 Dr. Chayanis Krittasudthacheewa Deputy Director Stockholm Environment Institute, Asia 11 Mr. Chanuntorn Katasaenee Translator Free lance 12 Mr. Christian Olk Head of Cooperation German Embassy 13 Mr. Christoph Muziol Senior Regional Adviser Natural Resources Governance Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) 14 Mr. Chhith Samath Coordinator WWF 15 Mr. Denson Yap Sales Manager Tideland Signal 16 Ms. Ei Thwe Deputy Staff Officer 17 Dr. Eric Kemp-Benedict Centre Director 18 Mr. Georges Dehoux Attaché 19 Mr. Hao Li Deputy Director Ministry of Environmental Conservation and Forestry Stockholm Environment Institute, Asia Delegation of the European Union to Cambodia Changjiang Water resources Commission 20 Mr. Hatsoulith Saysena Translator Free lance 164

185 Annex B List of Participants Participants from Academic Institutes, Partners, NGOs, Private Sectors and Civil Society No Name of participant Position Organization 21 Mr. Henrik Garsdal 22 Mr. Lain Watson 23 Mr. Ignacio Oliver-Cruz Attaché 24 Dr. John Dore Business Development Manager Senior Environmental Safeguards Specialist Senior Regional Water Resources Specialist DHI Asian Development Bank European Union Delegation to Lao PDR Australian Embassy 25 Juha Sarkkula Mr. Julien Katchinoff Foreign Affairs Officer U.S. Department of State 27 Ms. Kate Ross Mekong Program Associate International Rivers 28 Ms. Kate Lazarus Senior Operations Officer 29 Dr. Kim Geheb 30 Mrs. Kroesna Kang Dean Regional Coordinator, Greater Mekong International Finance Corporation (IFC) CGIAR Research Program on Water, Land and Ecosystems Royal University of Agriculture, Cambodia 31 Mr. Kosal Mam Translator - 32 Ms. Kyungmee Kim Programme Officer 33 Mr. Le Dai Nghia Coordinator of Development Cooperation Stockholm International Water Institute Embassy of Finland 34 Mr. La Chhuon Program Advisor Oxfam 35 Mr. Lor Bunna Head Office CARDI-MAFF, Cambodia 36 Mr. Marc Goichot Lead sustainable hydropower and river basin management WWF Greater Mekong 37 Mr. Marko Saarinen Counsellor Embassy of Finland 38 Mr. Men Nareth Student Affair Officer Institute of Technology of Cambodia (ITC) 39 Ms. Mia Signs Communications IWMI SEA/WLE Greater Mekong 40 Mr. Min Maw Deputy Director Environmental Conservation Department 41 Ms. Minghua Chu Principal Staff Member Ministry of Water Resources 42 Dr. Matthew McCartney Researcher 43 Ms. Miaojie Sun Research Assistant 44 Mr. Mosahiro Kato Manager of Technical Department International Water Management Institute (IWMI) Stockholm Environment Institute, Asia Nam Ngiep 1 Power Company, Lao PDR 165

186 Annex B List of Participants Participants from Academic Institutes, Partners, NGOs, Private Sectors and Civil Society No Name of participant Position Organization 45 Mr. Ni Duong Van - Can Tho University, Viet Nam 46 Dr. Nattawuth Udayasen Vice President ITD 47 Mr. Nanthaphan Hansarphiphat Business development Manager 48 Mr. Olay Phommavong Communications Officer Charoen Energy and Water Asia Co., Ltd., Thailand Nam Theun 2 Power Company, Lao PDR 49 Mr. Phothong Siliphong National Program Officer SDC 50 Mrs. Qiuchi Shi Deputy Director General Ministry of Water Resources, China 51 Mr. Quoi Le Phat - 52 Mr. Quoc Dang Ly Researcher 53 Dr. Rathana Peou CCAFS Scenarios Regional Coordinator Long An Provincial Department Of Science And Technology, Vietnam Mekong Delta Development Research Institute, Can Tho University CCAFS- CGIAR 54 Mr. Raza Mahmood Farrukh Water Resources Specialist Asian Davelopment Bank 55 Mr. Ronald Jones Research Advisor Learning Institute, Cambodia 56 Dr. Robert Carr Deputy CEO ewater, Australia 57 Mr. Russell James Executive Director, Policy and Planning Murray-Darling Basin Authority, Australia 58 Mr. Sam Nuov Assistant to FiA FiA, MAFF, Cambodia 59 Mr. Sam Shwe Deputy Director 60 Mr. Sok Chamroeun Executive Director 61 Mr. Stewart Motta Network Coordinator GMS 62 Mr. Saknoi Leangtongplew Deputy Managing Director Directorate of Water Resources and Improvement of River systems, Ministry of Transport, Myanmar Khmer Farmer Association, Cambodia CGIAR's Program On Water, Land, and Ecosystems (WLE) Charoen Energy and Water Asia Co., Ltd., Thailand 63 Mr. Socheat Penh Senior Programme Officer PACT Cambodia 64 Dr. Sokhem Pech Managing Director Pech Climate System Consultancy Ltd. 65 Mr. Sorn Pheakdey Water & Wetlands Coordinator IUCN, Cambodia 66 Ms. Nguyen Thi Minh Thurong Translator VNMC 67 Ms. Tahra Vose Regional Environment Officer US Embassy, Thailand 68 Ms. Thu Trang Ly Research Assistant Mekong Delta Development Research Institute, Can Tho University, Viet Nam 166

187 Annex B List of Participants Participants from Academic Institutes, Partners, NGOs, Private Sectors and Civil Society No Name of participant Position Organization 69 Ms. Titirat Suratin Assistant Program Officer Thailand Environment Institute 70 Dr. Therese Sjömander Magnusson Director 71 Dr. Toe Toe Aung Staff Officer Stockholm International Water Institute Forest Department, Ministry of Environmental Conservation and Forestry 72 Mr. Ton Samnang Project Officer FACT, Cambodia 73 Ms. Tram Le Research Coordinator 74 Mr. Tu Nguyen Duc 75 Mr. Tu Dao Trong Director Water And Wetland Program Coordinator Lower Mekong Public Policy Initiative/ Fulbright Economics Teaching Program IUCN Center for Sustainable Development of Water Resources and Climate Change Adaptation 76 Mr. Ung Sotheary - PDOWRAM Svay Rieng, Cambodia 77 Dr. Vannara Tek Executive Director The NGO FORUM on Cambodia 78 Dr. Vittoria Elliott Technical Director SciCap 79 Ms. Viengmany Vongkhamsao Government Affairs and Corporate Communications Deputy Director 80 Mr. Vitou Sam Executive Director 81 Mr. Vatthana Bathonan Communications Officer Nam Theun 2 Power Company, Lao PDR Cambodian Center for Study and Development in Agriculture Nam Theun 2 Power Company, Lao PDR 82 Ms. Virginia Simpson Program Manager Conservation International (CI) 83 Mr. Van Trinh Cong Researcher, Assoc. Prof. 84 Ms. Weini Li Consultant Mekong Water Technology Innovation Institute Compliance Advisor Ombudsman, IFC/MIGA 85 Mr. Xianghui Zeng Director Ministry of Water Resources, China 86 Mr. Xincai Wang Deputy Director General Changjiang Water Resources Commission, China 87 Mr. Yan Liu Deputy Director Ministry of Water Resources, China 88 Mr. Youqin Chen Deputy Director Lancang Hydropower Corporation, China 89 Ms. Woon Joun Lian Assistant Director ASEAN Secretariat 167

188 Annex B List of Participants Participants from the Mekong River Commission Secretariat (MRCS) No Name of participant Position Organization 1 Mr. Hans Guttman Chief Executive Officer MRCS 2 Mr. Detsada Soukhaseum Personal Assistant to CEO OCEO, MRCS 3 Dr. Prasong Jantakad Programme Coordinator AIP, MRCS 4 Dr. Cong Nguyen Dinh Programme Officer AIP, MRCS 5 Dr. Anoulak Kittikhoun Programme Coordinator BDP, MRCS 6 Mr. Ton Lennaerts International Technical Advisor BDP, MRCS 7 Ms. Praivan Limpanboon Participatory Planning and Institution Specialist BDP, MRCS 8 Dr. Phattareeya Suanrattanachai Socio-Economic Specialist BDP, MRCS 9 Mr. Hoy Ros 10 Mr. Phetsamone Southalack Capacity Developent and Monitoring Specialist Natural Resources Management Specialist BDP, MRCS BDP, MRCS 11 Dr. Paradis Someth Water Utilization Specialist BDP, MRCS 12 Ms. Soukouman Viravong Administrative Assistant BDP, MRCS 13 Ms. Southida Salaphan Programme Secretary BDP, MRCS 14 Mr. Aloune Sayavong Director ENVD, MRCS 15 Mr. Nguyen Van Duyen Programme Coordintor EP, MRCS 16 Mr. Dararak Yem Environmental Management Specialist EP, MRCS 17 Mr. Henrik Larsen International Technical Advisor EP, MRCS 18 Dr. Philipp Magiera Programme Coordinator GIZ/MRCS 19 Dr. Phan Nguyen Huong Thuy Programme Coordinator CCAI, MRCS 20 Dr. Ly Thim Socio-economic Specialist CCAI, MRCS 21 Ms. Tatirose Vijitpan Programme Officer CCAI, MRCS 22 Mr. Sopheak Meas Communications Associate CCAI, MRCS 23 Dr. Thanapon Piman Water and Climate Change Specialist CCAI, MRCS 24 Mr. Ix Hour Programme Coordinator DMP, MRCS 168

189 Annex B List of Participants Participants from the Mekong River Commission Secretariat (MRCS) No Name of participant Position Organization 25 Mr. Vu Minh Thien Hydrodynamic Modellor FMMP, MRCS 26 Dr. Malasri Khumsri Fisheries Management Governance Specialist FP, MRCS 27 Dr. Nam So Programme Coordinator FP, MRCS 28 Mrs. Kunthal Sap Secretary FP, MRCS 29 Mr. Peter Degen International Technical Advisor FP, MRCS 30 Mr. Boun Xaiyarath Chief of FAS FAS, MRCS 31 Mr. Sokong Ann Senior IT Assistant FAS, MRCS/OSP 32 Mrs. Phineth Huong Senior Finance Assistant FAS, MRCS/OSP 33 Ms. Natayaporn Jumratsri Chief of HRS HRS, MRCS 34 Dr. Sengamphone Chithtalath Programme Coordinator ICBP, MRCS 35 Ms. Phuong Nguyen Planning, Monitoring and Communication Programme ICBP, MRCS Officer 36 Ms. Tarika Wongsinsirikul Chief of ICCS ICCS, MRCS 37 Ms. Nguyen Hue Policy Coordination Expert ICCS, MRCS 38 Mr. Federico Rodriguez Irizarry Communication Officer ICCS, MRCS 39 Mr. Suthy Heng Programme Coordinator IKMP, MRCS 40 Dr. Michael Haase International Technical Advisor IKMP, MRCS 41 Mr. Voradeth Phonekeo Programme Coordinator ISH, MRCS 42 Mr. Khatthaneth Sensathith JRP ISH ISH, MRCS 43 Ms. Vandy Pich JRP Batch 10 ISH, MRCS 44 Dr. Piriya Uraiwong Programme Coordinator M-IWRMP, MRCS 45 Mrs. Tharath Lun Liaison Officer NAP, MRC 46 Mr. Lieven Geerinck International Technical Advisor NAP, MRC 47 Mr. Sophort So Director OPD, MRCS 48 Dr. Naruepon Sukumasavin Director PLD, MRCS 169

190 Annex B List of Participants Participants from the Mekong River Commission Secretariat (MRCS) No Name of participant Position Organization 49 Ms. Chitthina Misaiphon Secretary to Director PLD, MRCS 50 Dr. Vitoon Viriyasakultorn Technical Coordination Advisor TCU, MRCS 51 Dr. Henry Manguerra Council Study Coordinator TCU, MRCS 52 Dr. Tien Truong Hong Director TSD, MRCS 53 Ms. Klomjit Chandrapanya Advisor USAID 54 Dr. Marinus Vis Manager Sustainable Use of Water and Soil BDP, MRCS 55 Mr. Malcolm Wallace Consultant BDP, MRCS 56 Mr. David Grey Consultant BDP, MRCS 170

191 Annex B List of Participants Participants from Cambodia No Name of participant Position Organization 1 H.E. Mr. Te Navuth Secretary General CNMC 2 H.E. Mr. Pich Dun Advisor CNMC 3 H.E. Mrs. Chhoy Kimsor BDP-CU Member MOWA 4 H.E. Dr. An Pich Hatda Assistant to the Minister CNMC 5 H.E. Mr. Hell Tony Secretary General TSA 6 Dr. Chrin Sokha Deputy Director General MoE 7 Dr. Bun Narith Deputy Secretary General MME 8 Mr. Heng Rath Monida Director of Department Kratie PDOWRAM 9 Mr. Kim Savuth Director of Department Svay Rieng PDOWRAM 10 Mr. Chheng Phen Acting Director IFReDI, Fisheries Administration 11 Mr. Bou Chanserey Deputy Director General MoT 12 Mrs. Thin Saro Deputy Chief Office 13 Mr. Sok Khom Director 14 Mr. Kim Seiha Deputy Director Department of Cooperation and Debt Management, MEF Department of Human Resources Development, CNMC Department of Planning and International Cooperation, CNMC 15 Mr. Sun Sovaddanak Secretary and CNMC Chairman CNMC 16 Mr. Peou Vuthyrak National EP Coordinator CNMC 17 Mr. Chan Youtha Director of Cabinet MOWRAM 18 H.E. Mr. Tuon Thavrak Secretary of State MoP 19 Dr. Mak Soeun Panel Member MAFF 20 H.E. Mr. Ponh Sachak 21 H.E. Mr. Watt Botkosal 22 Dr. Sam Nuov Director General for Technical Affairs Deputy Secretary General, National Coordinator BDP/M-IWRMP Chair of Technical Advisory Body on Fisheries Management in the LMB for MOWRAM CNMC Fisheries Administration, MAFF 23 Mr. Sok Saing Im Hydrologist CNMC 24 Mr. Meng Monyrak Deputy Director Department of International Conventions and Biodiversity, MOE 171

192 Annex B List of Participants Participants from Cambodia No Name of participant Position Organization 25 Dr. Mak Solieng 26 Mr. Hak Socheat Director 27 Mr. Ou Sophanna 28 Mrs. So Sokha 29 Mr. Sakorn Pory 30 Ms Mak Somean 31 Ms. Kong Lamielpisey Integrating regional perspectives into national planning Specialist Director of Finance and Administrative Department Deputy Direct of Administrative Department Deputy Director of IKM Department Senior Assistant to National BDP Coordinator Assistant to National ISH Coordinator CNMC Department of Planning and International Cooperation, CNMC CNMC CNMC CNMC CNMC CNMC 172

193 Annex B List of Participants Participants from Lao PDR No Name of participant Position Organization 1 Mr. Chanthachith Amphaychith National Programme Coordinator 2 Dr. Daovong Phonekeo Director General 3 Mrs. Bouangeun Oudomchith Deputy Director General LNMCS Department of Policy and Energy Planning, Ministry of Energy and Mines Department of Water Resources, MONRE 4 Mrs. Phayvanh Virachith Department of Irrigation Ministry of Agriculture and forestry 5 Mr. Phoumyenh Khounthikoummane Department of Water Way 6 Mr. Subun Bounpachit Department of Planning 7 Mrs. Sirivanh Khonethapane National Advisor Ministry of Public Work and Transportation Ministry of Planning and Investment Ministry of Planning and Investment 8 Ms. Lackdavone Valangkoun Technical Officer LNMCS 9 Ms. Channaly Chandalasane Technical Officer LNMCS 10 Mr. Sommith Phommaviseth Technical Officer LNMCS 11 Mr. Aphisath Phanthaly Technical Officer LNMCS 12 Mr. Panthong Phetmurntham Technical Officer Num Ngum 2 13 Mr. Vonevilay Sombutmoonvong Technical Officer Nam Thuen-Kading Committee Secretariat 14 Mr. Bounpakone Phongphichith Deputy Director of Division MONRE 15 Mr. Phetsamone Keovongvichith Deputy Director of Division 16 Mr. Sommano Phounsavath Head of Division Department of International Organization, MFA Department of livestock and Fishery, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry 17 Mr. Viengsay Sorphachanh Deputy Director of Division LNMCS 18 Ms. Daovinh Souphonphacdy National EP Coordinator LNMCS 19 Mr. Khanmany Khounphonh Deputy Director General Department of Meteorology and Hydrology, MONRE 173

194 Annex B List of Participants Participants from Thailand No Name of participant Position Organization 1 Mr. Boonjong Jarusdumrongnit Deputy Director General Department of Water Resources 2 Ms. Panporn Suwan National BDP Coordinator TNMCS 3 Mr. Chaiyuth Sukhsri Member of TNMC TNMC 4 Mr. Buree Suwanarat 5 Mr. Hannarong Yaowalers Natural Resources Planning National Specialist Chairman of Thai Water Partnership 6 Mr. Warasak Phuangcharoen Environmentalist 7 Miss. Chawee Wongprasittiporn Civil Engineer, Professional Level 8 Mr. Chavalit Jiravichailit Civil Engineer 9 Mr. Chamnong Paungpook Policy and Planning Analyst 10 Mr. Noppadon Ekpaknark Civil Engineer 11 Mr. Paitoon Pongnara Nonghan - 12 Mr. Supreecha Supagijjarugs - 13 Mr. Jakkrit Poomsuwan Policy and Planning Analyst 14 Miss. Sahathaya Wiset Advisor 15 Ms. Nuanlaor Wongpinitwarodom 16 Mr. Pisanukorn Deekaew - Policy and Planing Analyst, Senior Professional Level TNMCS Foundation of Integrated Water Resources Management The Office of Natural Resources and Environment Policy and planning Royal Irrigation Department Department of Alternative Energy Development and Efficiency Office of the National Economic and Social Development Board Huay Saneng Sub Basin Cimate Change Adaptation Initiative Project Capacity Building Project, Loei Subbasin Working Group Capacity Building Project, Nonghan- Kumphawapi sub-basin working group Formulation of Water Resources Management Strategy in 9T-sub-area Transboundary Fisheries Management of Provinces of Bokeo and Chiang Rai TNMCS Rak Chiang Khong, Fisheries Conservation Group 17 Mrs. Ruamporn Ngamboriruk National EP Coordinator TNMCS 18 Mrs. Khanittha Poothong National ICBP Coordinator TNMCS 19 Mr. Mak Srikhao Professional Foreign Relations Officer TNMCS 20 Mrs. Kareema Wongsin National FP Coordinator TNMC 21 Ms. Rutima Aramrung Policy and Plan Analyst DWR, TNMCS 22 Mr. Chin Buaban Team Leader, Climate Change Adoptation working Group TNMCS 23 Mr. Kanchadin Srapratoom Chief of Loan Project Branch Royal Irrigation Department 24 Mr. Nipon Munnueangsaen Member of 3T River Basin Committee (RBC) TNMCS 174

195 Annex B List of Participants Participants from Thailand No Name of participant Position Organization 25 Mr. Prajya Ngamjan 26 Mr. Wiboon Pongtepupathum Assistant to Project Advisor for Namkam Working Group Director of Project for Hydropower Development at Irrigation Dams TNMCS Electricity Generating Authority in Thailand (EGAT) 175

196 Annex B List of Participants Participants from Viet Nam No Name of participant Position Organization 1 Tran Duc Cuong Deputy Director General VNMC 2 Do Hong Phan Deputy Director of Department MONRE 3 Nguyen Hong Toan Senior Water Resources Expert VNMC 4 Nguyen The Binh Deputy Director of Institute Research Institute for Aquaculture No. 2 5 Dang Thi Kim Nhung Deputy Director of Department EVN 6 Pham Thi Thu Hien Natural Resources Planning Specialist 7 Nguyen Thi Thu Thuy Senior Officer 8 Le Thi Kim Dung Deputy Head of Division BDP National Unit National Centre for Water Resources Planning and Investigation, MONRE Department of Water Resources Management, MONRE 9 Tran Thi Le Anh Senior Planning Expert - 10 Dao Linh Chi Head of Division Environment Administration, Monre 11 Tran Minh Khoi National EP Coordinator VNMC 12 Le Nguyen An Senior Officer VNMC 13 Vu Thuong Senior Officer VNMC 176

197 Annex B List of Participants 177